From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19794 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2013 05:15:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 19773 invoked by uid 89); 9 Oct 2013 05:15:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Oct 2013 05:15:13 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1VTm73-0001yf-81 from Iain_Sandoe@mentor.com ; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 22:15:09 -0700 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.104]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 8 Oct 2013 22:15:09 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 06:15:07 +0100 Subject: Re: src.git test repository MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Iain Sandoe In-Reply-To: <87y563dyf8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 05:15:00 -0000 CC: Binutils , GDB Development Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: References: <87y565m7ma.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87mwmlkojs.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87y563dyf8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> To: Tom Tromey X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00102.txt.bz2 Hi Tom, On 9 Oct 2013, at 02:29, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Iain" == Iain Sandoe writes: > > Iain> somewhere to put the recipes/defaults corresponding to the existing > Iain> checkouts would be handy. > Iain> or did I miss it? > > I don't really think that's a good way to work, or something that should > be supported, so I didn't investigate how to write it. The way we > discussed on the list is to use top-level configure arguments to disable > building various components. ah, that's the bit I missed - and, indeed, a better solution, thanks, Iain