On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 06:17:29AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> i've noticed this "problem" in trying to cross-compile other programs,
> such as "lftp". of course, it makes sense that, if you're
> cross-compiling, it's pointless to be checking for file existence.
> but wouldn't it make more sense to just skip the check, rather than
> aborting the configure?
>
> "lftp" was particularly bad about this -- it simply bailed. why not
> something like
>
> if cross-compiling ; then
> echo "Skipping check for /dev/urandom, deal with it."
> else
> ... processing for /dev/urandom ...
> fi
>
> wouldn't that be a cleaner approach?

What's the executable supposed to do when it doesn't have a random device
to work with? Sure, you could make it compile successfully without it,
but it will be the executable that bails instead of configure in that case.
Better to force the user to "deal with it" at configure time by bailing then.

>>> Dan

-- 
http://www.MoveAnnouncer.com              The web change of address service
          Let webmasters know that your web site has moved