From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27914 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2009 18:30:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 27886 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jul 2009 18:30:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:30:28 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n6TIUFjx013233; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:30:15 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n6TIUEV6010362; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:30:14 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n6TIUDPH025471; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:30:13 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4459E5081C4; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:30:13 -0600 (MDT) To: Ralf Wildenhues Cc: Samuel Bronson , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Update rebuild rules in non-automake directories. References: <20090628183334.GA5401@gmx.de> <20090728181748.GA3134@gmx.de> <87skggqwep.wl%naesten@gmail.com> <20090729053050.GC28894@gmx.de> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: Tom Tromey Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 18:37:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20090729053050.GC28894@gmx.de> (Ralf Wildenhues's message of "Wed\, 29 Jul 2009 07\:30\:50 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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/msg00712.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Wildenhues writes: Ralf> About the changes that should go upstream, are you saying I should get Ralf> them accepted upstream before they can go into gdb / src? Please note Ralf> that several of the changes are specific to GCC/src; for example, Ralf> m4_rename_force would require boehm-gc to move to Autoconf 2.64, or to Ralf> employ the workaround we add to override.m4, somewhere in its code. We already dealt with this, but for the record, I think it is best to at least make an attempt to send things upstream before checking in a local divergence. This helps make future imports less hairy. If upstream takes too long, for whatever reason, then IMO it is usually ok to just go ahead (particularly for configury stuff, which tends not to be very invasive). Tom