From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-57731-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 1645 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2008 19:23:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 1636 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Aug 2008 19:23:14 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de (HELO merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de) (131.220.223.13)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:22:35 +0000
Received: from localhost.localdomain (xdsl-87-78-69-216.netcologne.de [87.78.69.216]) 	by merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FCA9400014EF; 	Thu,  7 Aug 2008 21:22:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ralf by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.63) 	(envelope-from <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de>) 	id 1KRB3k-0004fS-Os; Thu, 07 Aug 2008 21:22:04 +0200
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:23:00 -0000
From: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de>
To: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFA: automatic dependency tracking
Message-ID: <20080807192204.GH27560@ins.uni-bonn.de>
References: <m3fxq2rilz.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20080807054840.GA26651@ins.uni-bonn.de> <m363qciwgj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <m363qciwgj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-08/txt/msg00154.txt.bz2

* Tom Tromey wrote on Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 07:09:00PM CEST:
> >>>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> >> +sinclude([../config/depstand.m4])
> 
> Ralf> Why sinclude?  Shouldn't aclocal fail if the file cannot be included?
> Ralf> (Just curious, really; I see this is done with other files, too.)

> I have a vague recollection that there was some version of autoconf,
> in the distant past, where sinclude was the only way to do this kind
> of inclusion.  Then, once this gets into the code, it tends to stick.
> 
> So, I think this is probably just inertia and not something more
> obscure.

OK.  I'll put it on my grand list of Things To Clean Up In GCC, GDB,
binutils, newlib, and where-not-else.

Thanks,
Ralf