From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-71403-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 20178 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2011 18:39:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 20170 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2011 18:39:41 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-pz0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-pz0-f41.google.com) (209.85.210.41)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:39:27 +0000
Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4so689944pzk.0        for <binutils@sourceware.org>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.71.193 with SMTP id x1mr1187825pbu.429.1303843166555; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.40.99 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <mcry62wq3jh.fsf@coign.corp.google.com>
References: <BANLkTi=mS+p-kDS=PDe5Lx9wxwhYK3tykQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTimD7ftqv6+=Ho_Mr4uyrcUufCQQBA@mail.gmail.com>	<mcr39l5m118.fsf@google.com>	<BANLkTinSO442Aj_mZ41F9ydzyt6+z4VGZA@mail.gmail.com>	<mcry62wq3jh.fsf@coign.corp.google.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 18:39:00 -0000
Message-ID: <BANLkTimipvrmJdTKKfwhezTf1979Y4Sbpg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: binutils prerequisites (recent zlib version - what else?)
From: Steffen Dettmer <steffen.dettmer@googlemail.com>
To: binutils@sourceware.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <binutils.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg00384.txt.bz2

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
> kevin diggs <diggskevin38@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wro=
te:
>>>
>>> Unrecognized --with options are ignored. =A0The difference in the
>>>
>>> Ian
>>>
>> Why? Wouldn't it be better to tell the poor, confused user that they
>> are configuring up the wrong tree?

Here I think the binutils/bfd/configure should check for ../../zlib,
which will be there in "gcc combined build", and use it, shouldn't it?
but of course then zlib needs to be built first etc.

maybe configure --help should have some support for AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS?

However, in this case it would still be missleading, because
binutils have --with-zlib (but no support for --with-system-zlib),
gcc has only (?) --with-system-zlib, so it seems to be let's say "incompati=
ble"
a bit.

Steffen