Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
Cc: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>,
	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com,
	binutils@sources.redhat.com, dj@redhat.com
Subject: Re: (top level patch) Autoconfiscate. (Woo!)
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 08:24:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <orlm2a5dac.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86smwijnhi.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org>

On Dec 28, 2002, Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl> wrote:

> Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> writes:
>> This autoconfiscates the top level.  Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu, produced
>> a Makefile with only trivial differences from before.

> Nothing serious, but...

> ...I get the following warning when configuring readline:

>    Configuring in readline
>    configure: WARNING: If you wanted to set the --build type, don't use --host.
>        If a cross compiler is detected then cross compile mode will be used.

We can't really help warnings like this from autoconf 2.5x, unless we
check each sub-package's configure to see which autoconf it's using.
The problem is that, in autoconf 2.13, the build platform defaults to
the host platform that is auto-detected, but in autoconf 2.5x, this
was fixed such that it is host that defaults to build that is
auto-detected.  So, you get the warning when you specify only --host,
since eventually the backward-compatible behavior in autoconf will be
disabled.  Worse yet, if you specify both --build and --host, you'll
get a different warning, since autoconf 2.5x wants this to imply that
we're doing cross-compilation.  Fortunately, it checks whether the
--build and --host arguments to see whether they're the same, and
disables this assumption in this case.  I heard talk about removing
these backward-compatible features a few months ago; I hope my protest
against it didn't get in too late; it would simply make it impossible
to have a tree like uberbaum unless *every* *single* component in it
switches to the newer version of autoconf.

> Anyway, as far as I can determine, the warning doesn't hurt, but we
> might want to get rid of it.

Ideally, the top-level should pass down to host packages exactly the
same --build, --host and --target flags that were passed to it.
Currently, we attempt to do it, but we fail because buildopt is no
longer set anywhere.  Oops :-)

This is a problem, because specifying --build no longer has any effect
on host packages.  I don't know whether any package actually relies on
--build these days, but it should be fixed.

> Note that this is probably caused by an earlier patch, and not by this
> last autoconfiscate patch, but I didn't notice it before.

It was probably the autoconfiscate patch that dropped the assignment
of buildopt.  Earlier, we used to pass both --build and --host down.

> P.S. Why is Makefile.tpl not included in the src CVS tree?  It is
>      included in the gcc CVS tree.

It should be there too.  Probably just a pilot error.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer


  reply	other threads:[~2002-12-28 16:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-12-27 20:03 Nathanael Nerode
2002-12-27 23:07 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-12-28  7:06 ` Mark Kettenis
2002-12-28  8:24   ` Alexandre Oliva [this message]
2002-12-28 10:05     ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-12-28 10:08       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-12-28 10:34         ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-12-27 23:23 Nathanael Nerode

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=orlm2a5dac.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br \
    --to=aoliva@redhat.com \
    --cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=dj@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
    --cc=neroden@twcny.rr.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox