Relaying as this reply seems to have been "disappeared" by the email Gods.

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 8:42 AM Iain Sandoe <idsandoe_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> grrr google bumped my mail … maybe you saw from the reflector ...
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Iain Sandoe <iain_at_[hidden]>
> Subject: Re: [SG15] P2717R1, EcoIS Introspection
> Date: 15 June 2023 at 14:17:15 BST
> To: René Ferdinand Rivera Morell <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]>
> Cc: Tom Honermann <tom_at_[hidden]>, Charles-Henri Gros <Charles-Henri.Gros_at_[hidden]>
>
>
>
> On 15 Jun 2023, at 13:06, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 4:32 PM Tom Honermann <tom_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On 6/2/23 5:08 PM, Olga Arkhipova wrote:
>
> I believe that IDEs and different generators will very likely be interested in build tool capabilities. And those IDE/generators processes might not even be able to launch a tool as they are not necessarily running in the environment the tool can run. Or they might be running on a different OS altogether for some cross-platform development.
>
> This is a very good point.
>
>
> Can someone point out some concrete examples of that situation that I
> can investigate? As I'm not familiar with that use case.
>
>
> A case that is common for me as a compiler developer.
>
> I am building on a system (say x86_64)
>
> My “target" is PowerPC and I want to build a toolchain “hosted" on PowerPC.
>
> So none of the host (powerpc) or target (powerpc) tools can execute on my build system.
>
> This means that, suppose, I want to know the capabilities of the host linker (which I might need to determine how to comfigure the host build) - I cannot find that by running _that_ linker, since it will not work on my build machine,
>
> There are more exotic cases (so called Canadian crosses where build, host and target are all different).
> Iain

-- 
-- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell
-- Don't Assume Anything  -- No Supone Nada
-- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net