From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: cross-compiling alternatives (was Re: [PATCH 0/1] Embedded Maintainer(s)...) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 10:12:00 +0100 Message-ID: <1213348320.26255.231.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <1209577322.25560.402.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <200806130843.05704.neundorf@eit.uni-kl.de> <1213346316.17853.28.camel@tara.firmix.at> <200806131106.18487.neundorf@eit.uni-kl.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200806131106.18487.neundorf@eit.uni-kl.de> Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Alexander Neundorf Cc: linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 11:06 +0200, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > Why on earth does someone need this explicitly during the build? > > If you have portable software, all of that should be hidden in the code > > and use "sizeof(int)". > > From the "developer of a buildsystem" POV: there will be users who will need > it. I think that epitomises what's wrong with autoconf. Sometimes, the best thing to do is tell your users that they _don't_ need whatever it is they're asking you for. -- dwmw2