From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5917 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2002 00:44:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 5866 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2002 00:44:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout6-0.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.177) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Dec 2002 00:44:41 -0000 Received: from doctormoo (syr-24-24-16-193.twcny.rr.com [24.24.16.193]) by mailout6-0.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.6/RoadRunner 1.20) with ESMTP id gB40iak13274; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 19:44:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from neroden by doctormoo with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18JNdh-0002uq-00; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 19:43:45 -0500 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 16:44:00 -0000 To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com, dj@redhat.com Subject: Re: (toplevel patch) host subconfigures in Makefile, fixed version Message-ID: <20021204004344.GA10151@doctormoo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Nathanael Nerode X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00099.txt.bz2 >> # gcc is the only module which uses GCC_FLAGS_TO_PASS. > >Could we use an automake conditional to cut down on the replication? ^^^^s/make/gen We certainly can, and will. Bruce actually sent me a decent way of doing this. The reason I wrote things out is that I actually anticipate some changes for purposes of accuracy, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if gcc's 'configure' section ought to deviate from that of other host modules. In my previous completed versions, there's actually a section in Makefile.def called "flags_to_pass", with an entry for each flag, and Makefile.tpl simply loops over them, inserting the ones appropriate for the situation. I intend to do that eventually. (Which flags are passed down when is a great mish-mash right now and I want to spend some time simplifying it as much as I can.) (My ideal layout involves adding a HOST_SUBDIR as well as BUILD_SUBDIR and TARGET_SUBDIR, and effectively unifying all of those sections. There's some evidence that this isn't a good idea though.) >> +expect/Makefile: configure-tcl maybe-configure-tk > >No maybe here? I believe that I tried it with TCL installed and not in the tree, and it failed. It shouldn't have though... so you're right, that should be a maybe. Will change. --Nathanael