public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug ada/14350] New: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version
@ 2004-02-29 21:37 jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-02-29 21:42 ` [Bug ada/14350] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-02-29 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
libada/configure.in says:
# Please keep the version number in sync with the general GCC version.
AC_INIT([GCC libada],[experimental pre-3.5])
This additional place with a version number hardcoded is a regression from
3.4. We've carefully reduced the number of such places to just two,
gcc/version.c and gcc/doc/include/gcc-common.texi, which are documented in
branching.html and releasing.html. This additional place - not documented
in the place RMs will look - is an unwanted addition. No version number at
all should be hardcoded here that appears anywhere else.
(The GCC version number is of course an entirely separate matter from the
*library* ABI version numbers, which need to be maintained independently
when the ABI changes. But ada/Makefile.in takes care to extract the library
version number from gnatvsn.ads rather than duplicating it; this file should
not duplicate the library version number either, which should remain kept
in exactly one place.)
--
Summary: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version
Product: gcc
Version: 3.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14350
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/14350] libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version
2004-02-29 21:37 [Bug ada/14350] New: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-02-29 21:42 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-01 10:25 ` charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-02-29 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-02-29 21:42 -------
Confirmed.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-02-29 21:42:04
date| |
Target Milestone|--- |3.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14350
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/14350] libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version
2004-02-29 21:37 [Bug ada/14350] New: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-02-29 21:42 ` [Bug ada/14350] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-03-01 10:25 ` charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-01 10:33 ` jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-03-01 10:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-01 10:25 -------
Given that this version is not used anywhere, I guess it's just a matter of
removing it completely, right ?
e.g. something like:
AC_INIT(Makefile.in)
Arno
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14350
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/14350] libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version
2004-02-29 21:37 [Bug ada/14350] New: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-02-29 21:42 ` [Bug ada/14350] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-01 10:25 ` charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-03-01 10:33 ` jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk
2004-03-02 14:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-02 14:22 ` charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk @ 2004-03-01 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk 2004-03-01 10:33 -------
Subject: Re: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC
version
On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Given that this version is not used anywhere, I guess it's just a matter of
> removing it completely, right ?
Yes. It's only used by configure --help and --version, and this isn't
particularly useful (only installed programs need support --help and
--version, not configure scripts, and --help and --version still anyway
work without a package version, and as a subdirectory configure script it
is only intended to be called by the build system and not by humans).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14350
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/14350] libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version
2004-02-29 21:37 [Bug ada/14350] New: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2004-03-01 10:33 ` jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk
@ 2004-03-02 14:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-02 14:22 ` charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-03-02 14:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-02 14:21 -------
Subject: Bug 14350
CVSROOT: /cvs/gcc
Module name: gcc
Changes by: charlet@gcc.gnu.org 2004-03-02 14:21:11
Modified files:
libada : configure configure.in ChangeLog
Log message:
PR ada/14350
* configure.in: Remove hardcoded gcc version.
* configure: Regenerated.
Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libada/configure.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.2&r2=1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libada/configure.in.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.2&r2=1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libada/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.3&r2=1.4
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14350
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/14350] libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version
2004-02-29 21:37 [Bug ada/14350] New: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2004-03-02 14:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-03-02 14:22 ` charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-03-02 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-02 14:22 -------
Fixed.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14350
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-03-02 14:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-02-29 21:37 [Bug ada/14350] New: libada/configure.in should not hardcode GCC version jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-02-29 21:42 ` [Bug ada/14350] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-01 10:25 ` charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-01 10:33 ` jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk
2004-03-02 14:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-02 14:22 ` charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org
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).