From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32381 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2002 21:08:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 32365 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 21:08:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 21:08:37 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5058A3FE4; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 16:08:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3DEFC04E.8050601@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 13:08:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Klee Dienes Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Update to current automake/autoconf/libtool versions. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00181.txt.bz2 > The 3-argument form works with both autoconf-2.13 and autoconf-2.50+. > So the three argument form fixes can be committed now? > I'm not sure I understand the question, but I'll elaborate on the situation a bit in hopes that I can answer it anyway. > > Automake-1.4p5 generates Makefile.in's that use the syntax: > > ylwrap PROGRAM INPUT [OUTPUT DESIRED]... -- [ARGS]... > > Automake-1.7 generates Makefile.in's that use the syntax: > > ylwrap INPUT [OUTPUT DESIRED]... -- PROGRAM [ARGS]... > > So if we use automake-1.7 to build Makefile.in binutils/ld/gas, we need to use the ylwrap from automake-1.7 as well, which uses the new syntax and therefore requires the change to the GDB Makefile.in. I don't think it's possible to have a version of the GDB Makefile.in that works with both versions. Right. But can the fixes be committed now (while we potentially twiddle our thums waiting for the end of the northern winter :-). I get the feeling that the answer is no. Outch! Andrew