John Chriswell wrote:
You might want to google for AC_NO_EXECUTABLES. It's an autoconf test that generates the >behavior you describe. Apparently the GCC folks wrote a new version of the macro due to the >above behavior.
As suggested, I googled and found this interesting answer for above error and behavior:
I've been investigating why gcc_no_link was true for a while. And found that it was the ld version of llvm - gccld - which caused the error and behavior.
gccld and other llvm tools have a bug originated from Win32/Path.cpp, in my case, on the MinGW platform. I'll leave this discussion in another thread.