configure WARNINGS

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

On 2012-10-23 03:52, David Holmes wrote:
>
> None of the above AFAICT. Here's the relevant output from bash -x 
> configure
>
> ++ case $ac_dashdash$ac_option in
> +++ expr x--with-target-bits=32 : 'x-*with-\([^=]*\)'
> ++ ac_useropt=target-bits
> ++ expr xtarget-bits : 
> '.*[^-+._abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789]'
> ++ ac_useropt_orig=target-bits
> +++ printf '%s\n' target-bits
> +++ sed 's/[-+.]/_/g'
> ++ ac_useropt=target_bits
> ++ case $ac_user_opts in
> ++ eval 'with_target_bits=$ac_optarg'
> +++ with_target_bits=32
> ++ for ac_option in '"$@"'
> ++ test -n ''
> ++ case $ac_option in
> ++ ac_optarg=yes
> ++ case $ac_dashdash$ac_option in
> ++ printf '%s\n' 'configure: WARNING: you should use --build, --host, 
> --target'
> configure: WARNING: you should use --build, --host, --target
>
> I'm guessing that setting target-bits is triggering some other kind of 
> argument checking ??
There's nothing special with target-bits per se, at this point autoconf 
is just parsing options and converting them to variables. You can check 
the shell script in generated-configure.sh, in the one I'm looking right 
now the "for ac_option" loop starts at line 1073, but this will change 
as it is regenerated.

The only reason I can see that you enter the warning print is that the " 
case $ac_dashdash$ac_option" falls through into the   *) case, which 
means it didn't match any --with-X or other options. This seem to happen 
for the option after --with-target-bits, but the log you sent does not 
show the value of $ac_option for this. If you had included just one more 
line it would have been:
     expr "x$ac_option" : ".*[^-._$as_cr_alnum]" >/dev/null &&
which would have given us a hint. :)

So I still think there's something weird with your command line.


> BTW I also noticed this:
>
>  ac_msg='sources are in 
> /java/embedded/users/dh198349/build-infra/builds/../common/autoconf, 
> but `cd 
> /java/embedded/users/dh198349/build-infra/builds/../common/autoconf'\'' does 
> not work'
>
> Though it doesn't seem to cause any problems.

You shouldn't go around reading the generated autoconf shell scripts. 
It's detrimental for your sanity. :-& There's a lot of cruft in there, 
sometimes I think it's a wonder it all keep from falling apart. But I 
think the bugs cancel each other out most of the time, so it tend to 
work pretty well on the whole. :)

/Magnus