From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9942 invoked by alias); 22 Dec 2012 04:43:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 9931 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Dec 2012 04:43:43 -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; Sat, 22 Dec 2012 04:43:37 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90EAD2E30B; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 23:43:36 -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 mJQh2AYQbrPh; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 23:43:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B9AB2E16D; Fri, 21 Dec 2012 23:43:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 83114C25A7; Sat, 22 Dec 2012 08:43:29 +0400 (RET) Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 04:43:00 -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: <20121222044329.GJ5370@adacore.com> References: <20121219072641.GQ3273@adacore.com> <201212211230.33487.vapier@gentoo.org> <20121221181443.GI5370@adacore.com> <201212211356.59716.vapier@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201212211356.59716.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/msg00777.txt.bz2 > this is common behavior when using aclocal. but the sourceware tree > does try to be a bit more "stand alone" when it comes to 3rd party > dependencies. i think the Blackfin sim subdir is treading somewhat > new water here. > > maybe the answer is to copy pkg.m4 from the latest pkg-config release > into the top level config/ dir ? This is indeed what Ralf suggested privately. I think it would be helpful doing that - it guaranties that we can reproduce the same result as anyone else (shielding us from variations in pkg-config, for instance). Thanks! -- Joel