public inbox for cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" <yselkowitz@users.sourceforge.net>
To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: [ITP] gcc-tools-autoconf, gcc-tools-automake
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 07:27:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4961B66D.5020605@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4961B10E.50708@cwilson.fastmail.fm>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Charles Wilson wrote:
> Yes, because gcc requires the use of an unmodified automake. Our
> existing 1.9.6 package is modified [*] -- and you can't have two
> versions of the same minor automake release installed at the same time
> in the same prefix.

In what way does gcc "require" a vanilla automake?  Below you say that
the only difference is some libobj fixes.  To me that means that gcc
will build, but the patches won't be quite right (meaning that gcc keeps
Makefile.in in CVS?).  That's not exactly what I call "requiring".

> Perhaps we could drop the libobj support from our am-1.9 packages? Sure,
> but then IIRC cygwin libtool (1.5 only? also 2.2? Can't recall.) will
> fail some of its regression tests -- with possible real-world
> consequences for packages other than gcc/binutils.

It would be good to know if the automake patches are no longer needed
with libtool-2.2, but for now let's assume the worst.

> [**] I'm cheating a bit with regards to libtool, as I haven't made a
> gcc-tools-libtool package. But that's because I think it is probably not
> necessary for Dave et. al. to try to update the libtool stuff in the gcc
> tree; it's already at git-master post-2.2.6-release; Ralf W. has been
> keeping it reasonably up to date; and you don't use libtoolize to do it,
> anyway. You manually copy the relevant m4 files -- sadly, libtoolize
> makes a hash of the src/ tree. At least it did the last time I tried to
> do it that way.

Our libtool is basicall vanilla anyway; the LT_OUTPUT patch (which
anyways I'm not sure that we need anymore) wouldn't be relevant here.

Dave, if you could please send me your .src.patch(es), then I'll be
happy to take a look at this.


Yaakov



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEAREIAAYFAklhtm0ACgkQpiWmPGlmQSOKzwCeMt9tQxwzcA63RJrueL7+P2Fg
g4MAn3/C7beibkD5VPw17GYc6ixjRcXx
=tkn+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  reply	other threads:[~2009-01-05  7:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-03 19:39 Charles Wilson
2009-01-03 22:14 ` Dave Korn
2009-01-05  6:20 ` Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
2009-01-05  7:05   ` Charles Wilson
2009-01-05  7:27     ` Yaakov (Cygwin/X) [this message]
2009-01-05  7:44       ` Charles Wilson
2009-01-06 17:49         ` Dave Korn
2009-01-06 17:54       ` Dave Korn
2009-01-05 13:35   ` Charles Wilson
2009-01-05 15:30     ` Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
2009-01-06  4:46       ` Charles Wilson
2009-01-07  5:37 ` Charles Wilson
2009-01-07  6:00   ` Christopher Faylor
2009-01-07 10:08     ` Dave Korn
2009-01-07 13:12     ` Eric Blake
2009-01-07 14:44       ` Charles Wilson
2009-01-07 15:50         ` Christopher Faylor
2009-01-08 17:06       ` Jari Aalto
2009-01-08 18:11         ` Peter Rosin
2009-01-08 18:42           ` Christopher Faylor
     [not found] <495FB6CF.1060701@cwilson.fastmail.fm>
2009-01-06 18:35 ` Dave Korn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4961B66D.5020605@users.sourceforge.net \
    --to=yselkowitz@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=cygwin-apps@cygwin.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).