From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20327 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2009 22:23:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 20283 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jul 2009 22:23:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (HELO rv-out-0708.google.com) (209.85.198.247) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 22:23:48 +0000 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id f25so970439rvb.0 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.172.20 with SMTP id u20mr5506074rve.16.1248819825949; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hydrogen.gmail.com (207-172-203-39.c3-0.upd-ubr7.trpr-upd.pa.cable.rcn.com [207.172.203.39]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l31sm1795508rvb.34.2009.07.28.15.23.43 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 03:09:00 -0000 Message-ID: <87skggqwep.wl%naesten@gmail.com> From: Samuel Bronson To: tromey@redhat.com Cc: Ralf Wildenhues , gcc-patches@gnu.org, binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Update rebuild rules in non-automake directories. In-Reply-To: References: <20090628183334.GA5401@gmx.de> <20090728181748.GA3134@gmx.de> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.6 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.3 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2009-07/txt/msg00704.txt.bz2 At Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:03:34 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote: > It seems a little odd to have a rule to rebuild aclocal.m4 when there is > no rule to rebuild configure. Are you planning to add that? (I don't > think this affects whether the patch is ok -- it is still an improvement > over the present situation.) You mean --enable-maintainer-mode doesn't already do that?