From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-102733-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 6192 invoked by alias); 15 Sep 2004 13:28:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 6180 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2004 13:28:30 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.58)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 15 Sep 2004 13:28:30 -0000
Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (pc960.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.205.4])
	by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8FDS7xm000249;
	Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:28:07 +0100 (BST)
Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i8FDSNvv018270;
	Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:28:25 +0100
Received: (from rearnsha@localhost)
	by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i8FDSIqA018268;
	Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:28:18 +0100
X-Authentication-Warning: pc960.cambridge.arm.com: rearnsha set sender to rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org using -f
Subject: Re: Obsolete building in source dir?
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org>
To: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
Cc: zack@codesourcery.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <200409151308.i8FD8jjT008752@greed.delorie.com>
References: <00f801c497a2$e2deb9c0$92b92997@bagio>
	 <xnr7p66f4v.fsf@greed.delorie.com> <20040914121705.A32238@synopsys.com>
	 <874qm0ejuf.fsf@codesourcery.com>
	 <200409141947.i8EJlOvo017876@greed.delorie.com>
	 <1095240160.1376.106.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
	 <200409151308.i8FD8jjT008752@greed.delorie.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: GNU
Message-Id: <1095254892.26494.18.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:16:00 -0000
X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00920.txt.bz2

On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 14:08, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > If we print out 'creating build directory in <target>-build...
> > configuring in <target>-build' then it's no-longer 'behind their back'.
> 
> Assuming the user catches that line in the heaping gobs of output
> configure produces (especially when builds are automated).  Better to
> say:
> 
> $ ./configure
> configure: Please create a separate build directory for builds including gcc.
> 
> $
> 
> ... so that the user KNOWS.

Why does the user have to KNOW this?  Why would they care?  We don't
assume that they have to know a lot of other things.  All they want to
do is build the compiler so they can install it.  I haven't seen a
single reason why they should care that this is done in a subdirectory
of the source rather than in the sources themselves.

R.