From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12673 invoked by alias); 18 Apr 2012 09:15:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 12663 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Apr 2012 09:15:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:15:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q3I9EuSG000649 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 18 Apr 2012 05:14:56 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q3I9Et8i031278; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 05:14:55 -0400 Message-ID: <4F8E860F.8050906@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:16:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: Jan Kratochvil , Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Fix in-src-tree builds by making gdbserver/gnulib/ a separate library (a la libiberty, etc.), and adding ACX_CONFIGURE_DIR. References: <1334127046-27627-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <20120413212559.GA5867@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4F88F188.1050401@codesourcery.com> <20120415164917.GA2861@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4F8BFB25.5030808@redhat.com> <4F8C5794.5050302@redhat.com> <20120416174339.GA11991@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4F8D9F1E.2070203@redhat.com> <20120417170521.GA9906@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4F8DA538.1060000@redhat.com> <20120417232552.GS2852@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20120417232552.GS2852@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2012-04/txt/msg00545.txt.bz2 On 04/18/2012 12:25 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> Okay, then here's the current list, adding "gnulib-wrap", for >> being shorter than "wrapper", while meaning basically the same. >> >> gnulib-wrap/gnulib/ >> gnulib-wrapper/gnulib/ >> gnulib-pkg/gnulib/ >> >> I'm torn now between gnulib-wrap and gnulib-pkg, pending >> more towards wrap. I think I'll go with that if I don't hear other >> preferences, but any of those is fine with me. Anyone? > > gnulib-glue? (hmm, not great, as it's more than glue, but we can > twist the meaning of glue to include the import) > gnulib-import? (to me, the extra characters are not an issue) I dislike gnulib-import as with gnulib-import/gnulib, the import is really on the "gnulib" subdir, and the "gnulib-import" is about the autoconf wrapping that is _not_ imported, so it feels backwards to me. > Personally, my preference is gnulib/gnulib, and I remember seeing > plenty of packages follow that pattern, so I don't feel that there > is anything wrong with this. Oh, shucks. Glad I haven't done any renaming yet. :-) That's two votes for plain "gnulib/gnulib", one against. > But on the other hand, it's not very > important, so whatever gets decided is fine by me (even gnulib-wrap, > which unfortunately is my least favorite :-P). Clearly we'll not be able to make everybody happy. I understood Jan's comment as a suggestion, not an objection, so I'll take the path of least effort, and get this over with. -- Pedro Alves