From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 51857 invoked by alias); 10 May 2018 03:08:36 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 51833 invoked by uid 89); 10 May 2018 03:08:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*f:sk:55aef98, HX-Received:d681, H*i:sk:55aef98 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mail-pl0-f45.google.com Received: from mail-pl0-f45.google.com (HELO mail-pl0-f45.google.com) (209.85.160.45) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 10 May 2018 03:08:34 +0000 Received: by mail-pl0-f45.google.com with SMTP id 59-v6so425432plc.13; Wed, 09 May 2018 20:08:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=957QRdaDcTOUevC1TW5MEps1c2quWJg/YgXedUAO4fQ=; b=rLLNU7f9KXnGb2CVFrEJth3DkH+1VHr99OhthEsk1gynPW9NKkYwBAfFy2taguHinM h8SDomWmTfU6fqC38o4WmTCBtqV0uQGF5yxgFi/y1YTolK8GjLThfhTYF+YYqdLXcpt8 riVQZgRzZH8j6uDi5xNp1fHbjXTVWHER8IM3Dqwo/vysiavkrZKFbPngySC2OqplYzgL czEHlP0Zh6DVitMwc0W1HCAVwHdb0PmgaSHQindl4gZBx4SfOEZMyVRx23Pf/0p+0upO qjPhP2kP2/cbNA1Ey6HGWeRGzyl7BYbsCLj8GDNsqkIR6kiMH1Q6Fw5ZYlNqeFmHv58s 3p9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tCxVdbLekwdRuA0gSfycHbL+zCsRghMPCAacW5XV943z2n0vAXb 0HzyL0ToLOfvk4vLD53Ot22bOA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZreVf4JjfrhYVNGwCAim9I9NtEGdHLwV1vid6C0DB6lzXCE6LdASdry1aGlomORW3lWlM1q3w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d681:: with SMTP id v1-v6mr47266108ply.16.1525921712776; Wed, 09 May 2018 20:08:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bubble.grove.modra.org (CPE-58-175-241-133.hdcz1.win.bigpond.net.au. [58.175.241.133]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m9sm40331379pff.41.2018.05.09.20.08.31 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 09 May 2018 20:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9F18683F90; Thu, 10 May 2018 12:38:27 +0930 (ACST) Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 14:40:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: Simon Marchi Cc: Joseph Myers , Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org, ratmice@gmail.com Subject: Re: Update autotools version for gdb and binutils Message-ID: <20180510030827.GA4717@bubble.grove.modra.org> References: <1525459337-26977-1-git-send-email-simon.marchi@ericsson.com> <20180507061528.GR28782@bubble.grove.modra.org> <7bced953b160e7baa38ccbac73824d3f@polymtl.ca> <20180508023041.GV28782@bubble.grove.modra.org> <55aef98df79c4685507a3fc1d65fce5d@polymtl.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55aef98df79c4685507a3fc1d65fce5d@polymtl.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-SW-Source: 2018-05/txt/msg00234.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:46:26AM -0400, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2018-05-08 18:12, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Tue, 8 May 2018, Alan Modra wrote: > > > > > I wasn't saying you must change all of binutils-gdb, let alone gcc, > > > just that it would be nice. binutils-gdb config/* is copied from gcc > > > > And as it's the start of development for GCC 9, it's essentially the > > optimal time for such a risky change in GCC. > > > > It's libtool for which an update may be the riskiest (necessary to > > revert > > libtool commit 3334f7ed5851ef1e96b052f2984c4acdbf39e20c, see > > , and need to > > check for any local changes relative to the last libtool version merged > > from that aren't in the new libtool version used). I don't know whether > > updating other tools in GCC would require updating libtool or whether > > the > > updates can be independent. > > I attempted to convert binutils-gdb to autoconf 2.69 / automake 1.15.1 and > it went reasonably well. I don't know very much about gcc, so I could try > to do the same in the gcc tree blindly, but I don't feel confident enough to > test and validate the changes. So I would avoid it if I can, somebody more > used to building gcc could do that part. > > Could we first rule whether we still need to support combined tree builds? > I don't have the necessary background to judge the importance of that > feature, but it would basically decide whether I can update the tools used > in binutils-gdb in isolation from gcc. The only combined tree issue I can think of when _GCC_AUTOCONF_VERSION differs between gcc and binutils-gdb, is that --enable-maintainer-mode might attempt to run the "wrong" autoconf on one of the trees. That shouldn't be a show-stopper. Let's see the patches. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM