From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16025 invoked by alias); 5 Jul 2002 16:45:30 -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 15995 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2002 16:45:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gandalf.codesourcery.com) (66.60.148.227) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Jul 2002 16:45:27 -0000 Received: from gandalf.codesourcery.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gandalf.codesourcery.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g65GeGN19601; Fri, 5 Jul 2002 09:40:16 -0700 Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 09:45:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell To: Geoff Keating cc: "dj@redhat.com" , "neroden@doctormoo.dyndns.org" , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , "binutils@sources.redhat.com" , "gdb@sources.redhat.com" Subject: Re: configure/make/make install with moving srcdir, builddir... Message-ID: <5200000.1025887215@gandalf.codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <200207042120.g64LKT521737@desire.geoffk.org> References: <61310000.1025803091@warlock.codesourcery.com> <200207042120.g64LKT521737@desire.geoffk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 --On Thursday, July 04, 2002 02:20:29 PM -0700 Geoff Keating wrote: >> 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. That's a possibility as well. In either case, we agree that we don't need this facility in the new Makefiles before we check them in. Thanks, -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com