From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8917 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2012 18:14:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 8908 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Dec 2012 18:14:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 18:14:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC7C22E156; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:14:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id t1mJQYgIENTg; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:14:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 690752E14C; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:14:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2E493C3904; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 22:14:43 +0400 (RET) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 18:14:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Mike Frysinger Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ralf Corsepius Subject: Re: Update some sim copyright headers to GPLv3-or-later Message-ID: <20121221181443.GI5370@adacore.com> References: <20121219072641.GQ3273@adacore.com> <50D4497B.2050600@rtems.org> <20121221120810.GF5370@adacore.com> <201212211230.33487.vapier@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201212211230.33487.vapier@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2012-12/txt/msg00773.txt.bz2 Just to clarify - the purpose of my messages are to raise the question of whether there might be something missing in our tree. > do you have pkg.m4 available ? i don't know what distro you're using, > but perhaps it splits it up into multiple packages so that you can > have `pkg- config` but not pkg.m4. I indeed have a file called pkg.m4 available in my system. However, I did not use the system aclocal, since the one that comes with my system has the wrong version. If I use the system aclocal, then I indeed get a complete aclocal.m4 being generated, with the only differences being in the header due to the difference in version. I think this is somewhat of an issue that the output would depend on what is or isn't installed together with aclocal, and that aclocal would generate an incomplete output without indicating any kind of failure. But I understand that, in the grand scheme of things, there are more critical issues to work on, and that this might not be our doing... -- Joel