From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tromey@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch] make info regression on --with-system-readline
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 09:38:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110101093815.GA24535@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8339pdq8la.fsf@gnu.org>
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 10:25:21 +0100, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Aren't you supposed to "make distclean" whenever you reconfigure?
In normal projects I am not used to. In GDB I do "make clean" but it may not
be fully reliable, I believe there is more broken in GDB build system.
But even if you do just first configure it is now broken in GDB as the files
get inappropriately distributed.
> E.g., what about all the *.o files you didn't remove?
They depend on config.h which gets regenerated.
Maybe if you only change CFLAGS and config.h stays the same (and it preserves
its timestamp). you would need `make clean'.
> However, I don't like rules that depend of Makefiles, because they
> tend to be re-run too much for no good reason. Note that this will
> re-make the docs each time you reconfigure, even if you didn't change
> the configuration.
We can stamp etc. GDBvn.texi if it is a concern (I do not find it so).
> > Another issue is that GDBvn.texi and gdb-cfg.texi should not be distributed.
>
> How can we not distribute them when gdb.texinfo @include's them, and
> needs that for setting some of the variables the manual uses? If we
> don't distribute them, end users will be unable to rebuild the manual.
> What am I missing here?
Both files are generated from gdb/doc/Makefile.
Thanks,
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-01 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-01 1:13 Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-01 8:08 ` [patch] make info out-of-src-tree " Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-01 9:34 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-01 10:51 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-01 9:23 ` [patch] make info " Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-01 9:38 ` Jan Kratochvil [this message]
2011-01-01 10:00 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-01 11:16 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-01 11:26 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-01 11:43 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-01 12:20 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-01 12:30 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-01 15:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-01 16:32 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-01 16:44 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-03 12:21 ` [new patch] " Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-03 12:57 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-03 13:02 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-04 5:43 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-04 6:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-01-01 11:40 ` [patch] " Jan Kratochvil
2011-01-01 12:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110101093815.GA24535@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net \
--to=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=tromey@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox