Re: LD not precious?

[Philip A. Prindeville]

On 01/14/2010 12:49 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Philip A. Prindeville wrote on Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 09:35:59PM CET:
>> On 01/14/2010 12:10 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>>> * Philip A. Prindeville wrote on Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 02:43:49AM CET:
>>>>
>>>> Is that an oversight? I ask because in a cross-compilation
>>>> environment, getting CC and LD right are equally important.
>>>
>>> Sure, but why would $LD be more important in cross compilation setups
>>> than in native ones?  The cross-compiler usually calls the right linker.
> 
>> Because I'm encountering Makefiles that call $(LD) directly, and
>> default LD to "ld" unless you explicitly override it (and not setting
>> it to $(CC)).
> 
> Then that is a simple portability issue you should take up with the
> authors of those Makefiles' input files.  They should add something like
>   AC_CHECK_TOOL([LD], [ld])
> 
> to their configure.ac, just like it is necessary to use AC_PROG_CC in
> order to use $CC.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ralf

And that will do the @LD@ substitution as well?