From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5938 invoked by alias); 19 Nov 2009 23:05:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 5914 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Nov 2009 23:05:46 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-bw0-f219.google.com (HELO mail-bw0-f219.google.com) (209.85.218.219) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:04:42 +0000 Received: by bwz19 with SMTP id 19so2068019bwz.8 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:04:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.8.199 with SMTP id i7mr651641bki.37.1258671879340; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:04:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from yakj.usersys.redhat.com ([85.93.118.17]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 2sm1089457fks.43.2009.11.19.15.04.38 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:04:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B05CF04.6020502@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:01:00 -0000 From: Paolo Bonzini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20090922 Fedora/3.0-3.9.b4.fc12 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Add support for --without-zlib (take 2) References: <20091102232319.GJ4531@adacore.com> <20091119211326.GB10089@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20091119211326.GB10089@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-11/txt/msg00165.txt.bz2 On 11/19/2009 10:13 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Hello Paolo, > > The following patch got approved for binutils and GDB, but I just > realized that config/zlib.m4 should probably be approved by a GCC > maintainer. I was just wondering if ou wouldn't mind taking a look > at the new config/zlib.m4? As long as it is not used by GCC configury, I don't think people mind here. The only suggestion I have is to have [default=auto] somewhere in the help string. BTW, zlib is always distributed with GCC so we always include zlib support (and instead of --with-zlib, there is a --with-system-zlib flag that does what you expect). Maybe you could do the same for binutils and gdb? In that case, centralizing the test in AM_ZLIB is certainly desirable, and gcc may pick up the macro later or parts of it. (Though there's no zlib in src, so probably you'd have to contact DJ Delorie to have it included in his list of autosynced directories). Paolo