From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-21251-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 6338 invoked by alias); 28 Dec 2002 21:51:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 6298 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2002 21:51:30 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO delorie.com) (207.22.48.162)
  by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 28 Dec 2002 21:51:30 -0000
Received: from envy.delorie.com (envy.delorie.com [207.22.48.171])
	by delorie.com (8.11.6/8.9.1) with ESMTP id gBSLp4G26567;
	Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:51:04 -0500
Received: (from dj@localhost)
	by envy.delorie.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) id gBSLp4Z09145;
	Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:51:04 -0500
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:14:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200212282151.gBSLp4Z09145@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj@delorie.com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj@delorie.com>
To: aoliva@redhat.com
CC: drow@mvista.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com,
   binutils@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <oradip51r7.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> (message from
	Alexandre Oliva on 28 Dec 2002 18:26:04 -0200)
Subject: Re: (toplevel) Fix dramatic breakage for ordinary crosses (related to program_transform_name)
References: <20021228093127.GA455@doctormoo>
	<orhecy5cyn.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
	<20021228163419.GA10686@nevyn.them.org>
	<or8yya58x4.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
	<20021228175919.GA17177@nevyn.them.org>
	<orn0mq3sch.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
	<20021228185007.GA22186@nevyn.them.org>
	<200212281859.gBSIxap07606@envy.delorie.com> <oradip51r7.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00739.txt.bz2


> Why not?  It's just a cache, after all!  Worst case, when you
> reconfigure, you get to rerun some tests.  So what?

Worst case is config.cache gets corrupt values, and the build breaks.
I agree it's rare.  If we understand the risk, and collectively decide
to live with it until an actual problem happens, I'm OK with that.

> > But it would be nice if autoconf managed this problem for us.
> 
> It can't.  Consider that the config.cache file specified in the
> command line may be in a directory that is not writable,

That's a different type of problem.  Does autoconf allow for failure
to write to config.cache?