Re: Fix Makefile.in in data-directory

[Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:11 PM, Jie Zhang <jie@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 10/21/2010 10:29 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Jie Zhang<jie@codesourcery.com> ?wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think it's really necessary to fix that. binutils and gcc also
>>> don't
>>> allow "make -j4 install" to directly after "configure". "make -j4 all
>>> install" also fails for binutils and gcc. I think it's already an
>>> convention
>>> that those software are built with
>>>
>>> ./configure
>>> make
>>> make install
>>>
>>> Do we really need the effort to fix GDB?
>>
>> fwiw, I think the answer is yes.
>>
>> Note that we don't need to consider ./configure ; make -j4 install.
>>
>> The issue arises with a simple "$EDITOR foo.c ; make -j4 install".
>
> Reasonable although I never used it before. This is an updated patch which
> does that. It fixes it by passing FLAGS_TO_PASS when recursively make
> install-only. It fixes my issue. I also tested by touching a source file and
> do "make -j4 install" in gdb directory. It behaves as expected. OK now?

Thanks for persevering.

The patch is fine with me, though there is one obvious improvement.
It could be left for another pass.

FLAGS_TO_PASS is big, and there are now multiple copies of it.
IWBN if there were only one copy.
I wonder how much duplication there is in the makefiles, and if a
Makefile.common is reasonable.  It could be pasted in by configure.
[I realize gdbserver has its own configure, but it could, I think,
still use the same Makefile.common.]
I'm not sure it's warranted just for FLAGS_TO_PASS, so it could be
left for another day.

Feel free to check this in as is if you prefer.