Re: PATCH Makefile.in

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>]

On Jul  3, 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 02:53:20PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 29, 2005, Ben Elliston <bje+dated+1120509497.910ead@air.net.au> wrote:
>> 
>> > There is no longer an in-tree version of DejaGnu in src/dejagnu.  This
>> > patch just keeps the gdb Makefile up to date.
>> 
>> Not really.  It has no advantage whatsoever for those who no longer
>> have dejagnu/runtest in their build trees, but it breaks for those who
>> happen to do.  I don't think it's enough of a clean-up to be worth
>> the potential hassle.

> I don't want to carry this baggage around forever.  We already rely on
> plenty of installed tools; I think it's long past time to add expect
> and dejagnu to the list.

This is an argument for the removal of dejagnu and expect from the
tree, which I agree with.  It's the one-line change in the test to
decide which RUNTEST to use that I'm opposing.  I can't imagine such a
line is too much baggage to carry around.  If you think so, well...  I
guess I'll just shut up and wait until your next ports require changes
in dejagnu.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}