Re: AC_EXEEXT

[Ralf Corsepius]

Tim Van Holder wrote:
> 
> On 16 May 2001 00:22:43 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> > Until now this package's configure.in has been using AC_EXEEXT alone
> > (w/o AC_PROG_CC), now I seem to need adding AC_PROG_CC, but ..
> > .. Adding AC_CANONICAL_HOST would give sense, but this also
> > apparently isn't sufficient.
> 
> This does seem like the right thing to do though, as here the .exe is
> not an important part of setting up compilation rules, but rather
> something specific to the platform.
> 

Fully agreed, wrt. this particular case.

But it's rather easy to construct nasty examples, e.g.:

Building executables for platforms requireing an *.exe suffix with
tools autoconf and automake do not support directly.

Example: ASM-sources.

configure.in:
AC_INIT(hello.S)
AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE(hello,0,no)
AC_EXEEXT
AC_CANONICAL_HOST
AC_CHECK_TOOL(AS,as)
AC_OUTPUT(Makefile)

Makefile.am:
bin_PROGRAMS=hello
hello_SOURCES=hello.S

BTW: This example triggers further problems in automake's and
autoconf's interaction wrt. handling ASM-code. AFAIS, CVS/automake
currently generates bogus code for ASM; autoconf probably might need
an AC_PROG_AS-macro to provide a more convenient interaction w/
automake.

Ralf