[3.2 PATCH] install-no-fixedincludes repaired

[3.2 PATCH] install-no-fixedincludes repaired

[Christian Cornelssen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 898 bytes --]

Dear GCC maintainers,

calling "make install-no-fixedincludes" leads to an error caused by
missing installation directories.  First, I added $(libsubdir)/include
to the MAKEDIRS variable in the toplevel `Makefile.in', and the
installation succeeded, but when I looked through the log file, I
found that some headers had been installed there and subsequently deleted.
This was due to the order of dependencies of install-no-fixedincludes
in the toplevel `Makefile.in'.  For a normal install, the headers
are installed very early and thereby also create the necessary
dirs.  I have reordered the dependencies for install-no-fixedincludes
in a similar way, and now it works again.

Note: The patch may be offset by a few lines from the original
gcc-3.2 toplevel `Makefile.in' because I've applied the DESTDIR patch
before. (cf. Oct 06 2002 "gcc-3.2 DESTDIRified")

Best regards,

Christian Cornelssen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 489 bytes --]

--- Makefile.in_	Tue Oct  8 01:32:11 2002
+++ Makefile.in	Tue Oct  8 02:39:48 2002
@@ -1187,10 +1187,10 @@
 .PHONY: install-no-fixedincludes
 install-no-fixedincludes: \
 	installdirs \
+	gcc-no-fixedincludes \
 	$(INSTALL_MODULES) \
 	$(INSTALL_TARGET_MODULES) \
-	$(INSTALL_X11_MODULES) \
-	gcc-no-fixedincludes 
+	$(INSTALL_X11_MODULES)
 
 # Install the gcc headers files, but not the fixed include files,
 # which Cygnus is not allowed to distribute.  This rule is very

Re: [3.2 PATCH] install-no-fixedincludes repaired

[Christian Cornelssen]

Dear GCC maintainers,

now after six weeks, what about the tiny patch as of 8 Oct 2002?
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg00419.html)

Regards,

Christian Cornelssen

Re: [3.2 PATCH] install-no-fixedincludes repaired

[Christian Cornelssen]

Dear GCC maintainers,

On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Christian Cornelssen wrote:

> now after six weeks, what about the tiny patch as of 8 Oct 2002?

Sorry for the wrong link, it's the predecessor:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg00418.html

Regards,

Christian Cornelssen

Re: [3.2 PATCH] install-no-fixedincludes repaired

[Christian Cornelssen]

Hi,

On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Nathanael Nerode wrote:

> Christian, this patch:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg00418.html
>
> although it works, is bad practice.
>
> Makefiles should *never* care about order of dependencies.
>
> I don't see a sufficient way to fix this correctly for 3.2, but
> I'm going to try to get it right for 3.4.  It probably involves breaking
> out some items into their own targets.

Good notice. However, many install* targets of e.g. `gcc/Makefile.in'
(as of gcc-3.2), including the commonly used ones, seem to be
susceptible to dependence ordering.  That is, if you already have
redesigned the common install* targets, just extending your approach
to `install-no-fixedincludes' should fix the problem. :-)

But as a consequence of what you have pointed out, I do not expect
my install-no-fixedincludes patch to get outside the 3.2 branch.
It's better than nothing and not worse than the other install*
rules, but in general it's not appropriate, I agree.

Regards,

Christian Cornelssen

Re: [3.2 PATCH] install-no-fixedincludes repaired

[Nathanael Nerode]

Christian, this patch:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg00418.html

although it works, is bad practice.

Makefiles should *never* care about order of dependencies.

I don't see a sufficient way to fix this correctly for 3.2, but
I'm going to try to get it right for 3.4.  It probably involves breaking 
out some items into their own targets.

--Nathanael