Re: Status of gcc/intl and src/intl?

["Zack Weinberg" <zack at codesourcery dot com>]

Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net> writes:

> Hi Zack,
>
> I saw your message about an intl/ update:
>
>   http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2003-07/msg00032.html
>
> Here's my story.  Gdb has a build problem, PR gdb/857, which is about
> intl/Makefile.in and the lack of a few files in the 'distclean' rule.  I
> started working on this and I noticed that gcc/intl is a lot newer than
> src/intl.

Yeah.  Updating src/intl to match gcc/intl is on my list but I am not
going to get to it soon.

> My plan is to add a few lines of kludgery to the top level src-release
> file and not touch src/intl/Makefile.in at all, on the grounds that
> src/intl is about to get a big upgrade soon anyways.  The specific
> kludgery is a couple of lines like 'rm -f intl/config.cache' and 'rm -f
> intl/stamp-h'.  I think this will be benign if an upgrade happens.

I'm not familiar with src-release so I have no idea whether this will
be a problem.  What will happen eventually is, gcc/intl will be copied
over to src/intl, and everyone's configure scripts will be modified to
match.  Testing this change is a bit daunting, which is one of the
reasons I haven't gotten to it.  Help would be appreciated.  (Note I
am moving, so I may not respond to mail in a timely fashion for the
next week or so.)

zw