From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26242 invoked by alias); 4 Jul 2002 21:20:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26222 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2002 21:20:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO desire.geoffk.org) (12.235.56.190) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Jul 2002 21:20:32 -0000 Received: (from geoffk@localhost) by desire.geoffk.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g64LKT521737; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 14:20:29 -0700 Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 14:20:00 -0000 From: Geoff Keating Message-Id: <200207042120.g64LKT521737@desire.geoffk.org> To: mark@codesourcery.com CC: dj@redhat.com, neroden@doctormoo.dyndns.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <61310000.1025803091@warlock.codesourcery.com> (message from Mark Mitchell on Thu, 04 Jul 2002 10:18:11 -0700) Subject: Re: configure/make/make install with moving srcdir, builddir... Reply-to: Geoff Keating References: <61310000.1025803091@warlock.codesourcery.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00052.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 10:18:11 -0700 > From: Mark Mitchell > --On Thursday, July 04, 2002 12:36:38 PM -0400 DJ Delorie > wrote: > > > > >> I think that's fine. And if we can really simplify our makefiles that's > >> worth more than being able to change the $srcdir around. We can always > >> add that later if someone really, really needs it. > > > > What about the case where you do a build on one machine, and do "make > > install" on many others with different mount points? Doesn't that > > need to know where srcdir is, yet srcdir is a different location for > > them? > > Yes -- but this is exactly the kind of thing that I think we can live > without. > > I know people do this; I know it's convenient. ... It may be that it's easier to replace this usage with another convenient way to do things. For instance, GCC is supposed to be location-independent; perhaps we could ask that people who would use 'make install' to install on multiple machines in different places instead use the (well-tested and often-used) facilities to install in an alternative directory, and then use 'tar' or a package management tool to move the binaries to where they need to go. It's arguable that really, GCC's makefiles shouldn't be dealing with many of these things at all (like uninstalling or installing over an earlier version); it's better to delegate them to a real package-management system. -- - Geoffrey Keating