From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel,gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: Re: Guile with win32 cross compiling Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:03:30 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20110326220651.GA8300@flap> <20110401185020.GC13643@flap> <87r58rpfge.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1304024637 19025 80.91.229.12 (28 Apr 2011 21:03:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 21:03:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-guile@gnu.org, guile-devel@gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 28 23:03:49 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QFYNH-0000Ie-DO for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:03:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48724 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QFYNG-0002XW-Px for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:03:46 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:34153) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QFYND-0002T4-Bs for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:03:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QFYNC-0007cS-FY for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:03:43 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:64625 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QFYNA-0007bs-5c; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:03:40 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 384F2543F; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:05:42 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=ivUD0uiHvduF CeeaSG/90V+TMfs=; b=ZFB7aW/gMUbpFsKAesnYDMOiuPGvcO1jtsIrJAf8Ua1K BWP77zhQfq6qQkabW7I+OejOl0d5vuKjnbaTzn9gTuYo4HO/8IlQfim7sOMMTuEZ SzKWzGXOhyDzAZ1ThECjkXB4s8GBvVQymUkwLje2IDCOxTLjxA7PcR40o5XRgMs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=eEIMhs kBnlwluyu86uW2QFi9cwUB8aRr5zXXfnwUcy2MqGC6uoF3+CBZZlDs19VBSzo++T he40BZYl2C4ntImBc1ZeKi4vACPLINwJh5YiH9UsLv4dkzt7dPJOgVa1IY4Ew+Dj cUNLTLsZEFk1yXSuskRwgbpjIVTXsNMicXCvE= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14560543E; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:05:39 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3E485543D; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:05:35 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87r58rpfge.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Sun, 24 Apr 2011 22:22:25 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 44F4840E-71DB-11E0-8E4A-E8AB60295C12-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:12377 gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:5542 Archived-At: On Sun 24 Apr 2011 22:22, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > Looks good to me. Could you factor it into an M4 macro, use > AC_CACHE_CHECK, and move that to acinclude.m4? I tried and failed, so I pushed it anyway. Would you like to do the refactoring as a separate commit? :-)) Sorry for being pathetic here but it is beyond my autofoo. Cheers, Andy --=20 http://wingolog.org/