From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27799 invoked by alias); 11 May 2008 21:51:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 27783 invoked by uid 22791); 11 May 2008 21:51:32 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 11 May 2008 21:51:13 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3B5C98278; Sun, 11 May 2008 21:51:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92A0B98149; Sun, 11 May 2008 21:51:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JvJRm-0002gC-OH; Sun, 11 May 2008 17:51:10 -0400 Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 22:26:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Thiago Jung Bauermann Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC][patch 1/9] initial Python support Message-ID: <20080511215110.GA10113@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Thiago Jung Bauermann , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20080429155212.444237503@br.ibm.com> <20080429155304.288626880@br.ibm.com> <1209963038.25743.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080505131026.GB27076@caradoc.them.org> <1209996380.25743.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080505144606.GA32577@caradoc.them.org> <1210542361.617.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1210542361.617.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-05/txt/msg00369.txt.bz2 On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 06:46:01PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > I just noticed that configure doesn't offer -prefix, -include or -lib > options to any of the libraries GDB currently uses, including recently > added ones. Does it have to be different for the Python library? No. Add whichever is most convenient, I think. > Perhaps fiddling with CFLAGS/LDFLAGS is enough anyway? I've no opinion. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery