From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17510 invoked by alias); 24 Apr 2013 18:58:18 -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 17501 invoked by uid 89); 24 Apr 2013 18:58:18 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:58:17 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3OIwGVd006086 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:58:16 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3OIwF1C032621 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:58:15 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: introduce common.m4 References: <871u9zomzd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <51782A71.7030305@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 01:47:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <51782A71.7030305@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:54:41 +0100") Message-ID: <87obd3n4c8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00755.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Pedro> What's the advantage of doing it this way? Caching? Doesn't autoconf Pedro> use the cached value if there are multiple AC_CHECK_FOOs for the same Pedro> thing? Not super sure I like this over keeping each directory aware Pedro> of its dependencies, but I suppose I can go along. The advantage is in maintenance. Right now one must remember to update both gdb and gdbserver configure scripts in parallel. >> This process revealed a few things not checked for in gdbserver >> (nothing too crucial I think) and also that the decl check for getopt >> was dead. Pedro> Ah, an "also". ;-) Yeah. I'll split it out. >> gdbserver: >> * acinclude.m4: Include common.m4, codeset.m4. Pedro> codeset.m4? It was needed for the AM_LANGINFO_CODESET call, which was needed for HAVE_LANGINFO_CODESET. Tom