Re: autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

Re: autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

[Nathanael Nerode]

DJ Delorie wrote:

>>* I'll assume that any directory which doesn't appear in the gcc 
>>repository or the src repository, and which isn't created by the top 
>>level configure script, doesn't exist (and any references to configuring 
>>it are obselete and can be removed).  Sound reasonable?
> 
> I didn't say they didn't exist.  I said you don't have to worry about
> them.  I think Cygnus used to keep local copies of *everything* and
> use the toplevel script to build it all, but that's no longer the case
> (we have a few extras that gcc+src don't have, but that's not your
> problem).

All right, I've got the first (of several) patches sent to
gcc-patches.  This one *only* cleans out makefile targets for nonexistent
directories; it doesn't actually do any autoconfiscation.  It does,
however, make the job of autoconfiscation a lot easier for me.  Hope this
can get reviewed   quickly...

My next patch is to autoconfiscate the remainder of the 'utils'
directory.  It *looks* like this is part of GDB, and so should be
submitted to gdb-patches -- is this correct?

--Nathanael Nerode
neroden@doctor.moo.mud.org
neroden@twcny.rr.com

Re: autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

[DJ Delorie]

> My next patch is to autoconfiscate the remainder of the 'utils'
> directory.  It *looks* like this is part of GDB, and so should be
> submitted to gdb-patches -- is this correct?

It's probably the best place to start.

Re: autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Phil" == Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com> writes:

>> (The current script assumes a huge list of tools including emacs
>> 18, emacs 19, apache (!?!), and so I hope they aren't all still
>> configured by this script!)

Phil> I honestly don't know about some of that stuff.  Obviously
Phil> they're not part of the toolchain[*], but I can see where the
Phil> original authors might have said to themselves, "hey, let's
Phil> write a super-generic build script that can configure arbitrary
Phil> programs," or some such.

The top-level configure.in code was written inside Cygnus in the
distant past.  The code in the gcc and src trees still has pieces of
this legacy.  For instance, I added the apache build rules in early
1996 to support a project we were working on at the time.  The Emacs
stuff even predates that.

Tom

Re: autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

[DJ Delorie]

> * I'll assume that any directory which doesn't appear in the gcc 
> repository or the src repository, and which isn't created by the top 
> level configure script, doesn't exist (and any references to configuring 
> it are obselete and can be removed).  Sound reasonable?

I didn't say they didn't exist.  I said you don't have to worry about
them.  I think Cygnus used to keep local copies of *everything* and
use the toplevel script to build it all, but that's no longer the case
(we have a few extras that gcc+src don't have, but that's not your
problem).

> OK, you've got me: what's a host-x-host build?  Is it where the build 
> machine is the same as the target but the host is different?

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.0.2/gcc_14.html#SEC167

Re: autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

[Zack Weinberg]

On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 01:59:55PM -0500, Phil Edwards wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 08:22:40AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > I am autoconfiscating the top level directory, as suggested in the
> > beginners projects list.
> 
> Wow.  We listed that as a beginner project?

It's projects for beginners to GCC, not programming in general.  Lots
of those projects are quite difficult.

zw

Re: autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

[Phil Edwards]

On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 08:22:40AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> I am autoconfiscating the top level directory, as suggested in the
> beginners projects list.

Wow.  We listed that as a beginner project?


> The ones in the gcc CVS tree are easy to find, but I know that there are
> others from other sources -- what others are this script used for?

For extraordinarily mind-bubblingly stupid political reasons, the GNU
toolchain is split into two CVS repositories: one containing GCC, and one
containing a bunch of other things:  binutils (the linker, the assembler,
etc), gdb, the Tcl/Tk front end for gdb, the portable C library called
newlib, the platform simulator, and a bunch of other stuff which I don't
remember.

Many GNU hackers glue these trees together when building tools; the scripts
and makefiles know about the sibling trees.  For example, if binutils and
gcc are in the same tree, then the top-level makefiles will build binutils
first, and then when gcc builds, it knows to use the freshly-built assembler
and linker and whatnot living in the next directory over.

The idea at the top-level is "whatever sub-packages happen to exist,
build them."


> (The
> current script assumes a huge list of tools including emacs 18, emacs 19, 
> apache (!?!), and so I hope they aren't all still configured by this
> script!)

I honestly don't know about some of that stuff.  Obviously they're not
part of the toolchain[*], but I can see where the original authors might
have said to themselves, "hey, let's write a super-generic build script
that can configure arbitrary programs," or some such.

I've never heard of anyone taking advantage of this, but then I'm not a
system vendor.


[*]  Anyone who considers a web server as part of the toolchain is severely
     broken in the head.

Phil

-- 
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams

Re: autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

[DJ Delorie]

> * I'd love to know what subdirectories still exist which are configured
> using this toplevel script.

The correct procedure would be to autoconfiscate all the
subdirectories before the top directory.  The only two
repositories you need to worry about IMHO are gcc and src.
GCC you know about.  For src, you need this:

  cvs -z 9 -d :pserver:anoncvs@sources.redhat.com:/cvs/src login
  {enter "anoncvs" as the password}
  cvs -z 9 -d :pserver:anoncvs@sources.redhat.com:/cvs/src co .

See also http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/?cvsroot=src

The directories you need to worry about are the ones with configure.in
but no configure.  The only one I could find was the utils/
subdirectory.

I stronly suggest you test each autoconfiscation with a native, cross,
canadian, and host-x-host build.  Yes, this is time consuming, but
build bugs are usually quite subtle.

autoconfiscating top level directory -- info wanted

[Nathanael Nerode]

I am autoconfiscating the top level directory, as suggested in the
beginners projects list.

I'm attempting to maintain the semantics of the current configure script
as far as possible.  However, in the spirit of removing cruft:

* I'd love to know what subdirectories still exist which are configured
using this toplevel script.

The ones in the gcc CVS tree are easy to find, but I know that there are
others from other sources -- what others are this script used for?  (The
current script assumes a huge list of tools including emacs 18, emacs 19, 
apache (!?!), and so I hope they aren't all still configured by this
script!)

Please send information to neroden@twcny.rr.com since I do not read this
list regularly.

--Nathanael Nerode
neroden@twcny.rr.com