From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31749 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2012 16:07:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 31721 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Nov 2012 16:06:58 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:06:52 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qAFG6nM9031637 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:06:49 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qAFG6lgs026583 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:06:48 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: "Pierre Muller" Cc: "'Pedro Alves'" , Subject: Re: [RFA] Remove AC_HEADER_STAT from configure.ac References: <50a4aadb.c54c420a.715f.5d53SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> <50A4C0C5.8020901@redhat.com> <22837.8922366121$1352989522@news.gmane.org> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:07:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <22837.8922366121$1352989522@news.gmane.org> (Pierre Muller's message of "Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:24:41 +0100") Message-ID: <87fw4a26lk.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2012-11/txt/msg00409.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pierre" == Pierre Muller writes: Pierre> PS: In the regenerated files, Pierre> I discovered that configure has a strange, apparently unrelated Pierre> change... Is this normal? It can be. Sometimes someone will use the wrong autoconf to regenerate the configure script, or sometimes someone will forget to run it after a change. Tom