From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-8165-listarch-gdb=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 26969 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2002 21:42:20 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 26860 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2002 21:42:16 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc53.attbi.com) (204.127.198.39)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2002 21:42:16 -0000
Received: from ocean.lucon.org ([12.234.143.38]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP
          id <20020326214216.ZCW2951.rwcrmhc53.attbi.com@ocean.lucon.org>;
          Tue, 26 Mar 2002 21:42:16 +0000
Received: by ocean.lucon.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 81EFE125C1; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 13:42:13 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 13:42:00 -0000
From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
To: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: The canadian cross build is broken
Message-ID: <20020326134213.A8691@lucon.org>
References: <20020322225214.A23883@lucon.org> <3C9C9F3A.6030609@cygnus.com> <20020323101441.A799@lucon.org> <200203252214.g2PMEqj02765@greed.delorie.com> <20020326132429.A8347@lucon.org> <200203262135.g2QLZYQ13982@greed.delorie.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <200203262135.g2QLZYQ13982@greed.delorie.com>; from dj@redhat.com on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 04:35:34PM -0500
X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00246.txt.bz2

On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 04:35:34PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > How about this one?
> 
> The configure.in changes look ok, but...
> 
> > 	* config.table: Support --with-build-subdir.
> 
> Why are we throwing away the ability to have multiple host frags?  Of
> course, that whole config.table file looks a bit convoluted.

What multiple host frags? I am not sure what you meant by that. The
only thing I change is to use ${libiberty_topdir} to locate the host
frags instead the current convoluted way. Do you have an example?


H.J.