This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: top level: make more dependencies explicit
On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 03:51:18PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 01:45:40PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 01:09:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >
> > >>Nathanael,
> > >>
> > >>FYI, I'm about to revert this change:
> > >>
> > >>2002-09-25 Nathanael Nerode <neroden@gcc.gnu.org>
> > >>
> > >> * Makefile.tpl: Make subsituted variables more autoconfy.
> > >> * Makefile.in: Regenerate.
> > >> * configure: Make seds more autoconfy.
> > >>
> > >>It breaks both the GDB and BINUITLS snapshot processes. Details to
> > >>follow, however, suggest a short pause.
> > >
> > >Uh... yuck.
> > >
> > >Are there some details on the GDB and BINUTILS snapshot processes so that
> > >I can fix *them*? This change is going to happen eventually, even if
> > >it's reverted for now; the Makefile changes will be necessary for
> > >autoonfiscation.
> > >
> > >Wait, let me look at Makefile.in...
> > >
> > >Ewwwww. The taz rules use Makefile.in *as a Makefile*.
> > >That's the root of the problem, isn't it? Incidentally, that's
> > >disgusting. :-)
> >
> > Well I think ``SHELL = @config_shell@'' is ugly :-) Why can't the
> > configury code edit ``s/^SHELL =.*/SHELL = $.../''.
>
> Because that's disgusting? Having something which doesn't look like a
> configury-overridden variable be edited in configure is very fragile.
>
> > The mechanism is very old (it pre-dates me as GDB release engineer).
> > Changing it is going to involve updates to many things - snapshot
> > scripts, release process doco, .... so won't happen overnight.
>
> GCC has had a separate script to make releases for years and years.
> It's time GDB and Binutils did the same.
FWIW, I like the current GDB release scheme a lot. It is very useful in
my envrionment.
H.J.