From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <simark@simark.ca>
Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67B023857C66
 for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 15:43:04 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 67B023857C66
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca
Received: from [10.0.0.11] (173-246-6-90.qc.cable.ebox.net [173.246.6.90])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B3CEB1E5F9;
 Sun, 19 Jul 2020 11:43:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] config/debuginfod.m4: Use PKG_CHECK_MODULES
To: Aaron Merey <amerey@redhat.com>, Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Cc: Aaron Merey via Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>,
 Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
 gdb-patches@sourceware.org
References: <20200502022903.175852-1-amerey@redhat.com>
 <3d9da16939fa6b503188033b56d30531e03d5d2a.camel@redhat.com>
 <CAJDtP-QOGoANBnhBMqEp9-GEHn4r=_3P9RD8pwtbpA-PPgHxTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <87a72ino27.fsf@tromey.com>
 <CAJDtP-QKmRFkSQgnJcT+cycqidR_S41K-Z9Lbw15UkyKwEWz9w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca>
Message-ID: <64517fee-8b8f-84b2-a116-c3d146ff1119@simark.ca>
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 11:43:00 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJDtP-QKmRFkSQgnJcT+cycqidR_S41K-Z9Lbw15UkyKwEWz9w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
 SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 15:43:05 -0000

On 2020-07-16 6:37 p.m., Aaron Merey wrote:
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 4:56 PM Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> "Aaron" == Aaron Merey via Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org> writes:
>>
>> Aaron>         * Makefile.in: Replace LIBDEBUGINFOD with DEBUGINFOD_LIBS.
>> Aaron>         * aclocal.m4: Rebuild.
>>
>> Instead of inlining pkg.m4 into aclocal.m4, how about making
>> config/pkg.m4 and then using m4_include from gdb/acinclude.m4?
>> That's what gdb does for other shared m4 code.
> 
> Resending the patch for this since my last attempt didn't seem to
> properly reply to
> Tom's email.
> 

Since it's debuginfo.m4 that is using PKG_CHECK_MODULES, can you put the include
of pkg.m4 in debuginfo.m4, instead of in {binutils,gdb}/configure.ac?

Otherwise, from GDB's point of view I think it looks good, unless Tom has some things to add.

Simon