From: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
To: Joe.Buck@synopsys.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Obsolete building in source dir?
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 20:08:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200409141943.i8EJhpx2017814@greed.delorie.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040914121705.A32238@synopsys.com> (message from Joe Buck on Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:17:05 -0700)
> > Since every other source package on the planet (it seems) supports
> > building in the source directory, gcc should too. To do otherwise
> > would require an SC decision, as it would make gcc incompatible with
> > everything else.
>
> The SC cannot force people to submit patches to fix the problem;
> building in the source directory has been at least partially broken
> for years.
The SC decision is "do we *want* to support building in srcdir, or
should we reject such attempts?" Once we know what the SC wants, we
can find someone to make the changes (probably me).
There are a few of us who actively fix build-in-src bugs, mostly
because we feel it's important to act like other GNU packages, but we
can stop feeling that way if the SC deems it so.
> I don't think that this is an SC matter. The SC only has the power to
> say no (as in demanding that a patch that breaks functionality not
> be accepted), likewise the RM.
I think it's appropriate for the SC to get past the political issue of
*wanting* to support it or not. It's somewhat controversial (based on
historical arguments about it) whether the effort spent on maintaining
it is worth it.
Last time I worked on it, I think there was one libfoo directory that
still needed a tweak; libiberty builds in srcdir just fine, and only
directories that get built more than once are of concern anyway.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-14 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-11 4:06 Giovanni Bajo
2004-09-13 7:34 ` DJ Delorie
2004-09-14 19:21 ` Joe Buck
2004-09-14 19:40 ` Zack Weinberg
2004-09-14 19:59 ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-09-14 20:12 ` DJ Delorie
2004-09-14 21:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2004-09-14 22:25 ` DJ Delorie
2004-09-26 23:05 ` Marc Espie
2004-09-28 17:38 ` Per Bothner
2004-09-15 11:09 ` Richard Earnshaw
2004-09-15 15:43 ` DJ Delorie
2004-09-15 16:16 ` Richard Earnshaw
2004-09-15 16:58 ` Phil Edwards
2004-09-15 21:15 ` Alexandre Oliva
2004-09-16 5:59 ` Ralf Corsepius
2004-09-16 16:47 ` DJ Delorie
2004-09-17 11:08 ` Ralf Corsepius
2004-09-17 21:12 ` DJ Delorie
2004-09-17 16:38 ` Alexandre Oliva
2004-09-18 15:14 ` Kai Henningsen
2004-09-18 17:31 ` Alexandre Oliva
2004-09-19 18:41 ` Kai Henningsen
2004-09-20 8:51 ` Ralf Corsepius
2004-09-16 22:01 ` Matthias B.
2004-09-14 20:08 ` DJ Delorie [this message]
2004-09-14 20:18 ` Joe Buck
[not found] ` <mailman.80195.1095191985.18468.gnu-gcc@lists.nsr.labs.mot.com>
2004-09-15 6:38 ` Loren James Rittle
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200409141943.i8EJhpx2017814@greed.delorie.com \
--to=dj@redhat.com \
--cc=Joe.Buck@synopsys.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).