* GCC depending on perl?
@ 2001-09-22 19:29 Andrew Cagney
2001-09-27 5:39 ` Alexandre Oliva
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2001-09-22 19:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc; +Cc: ac131313
Hello,
I've noticed several recent changes to GCC have effectively added a
dependency on PERL. Well, to be exact, it looks like configure probes
for perl and certain features and then adjusts the build accordingly.
This just strikes me as strange since PERL isn't listed in the tools
that can be used in a Makefile.
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards_52.html .
I'd have only expected such a dependency to be added when something like
--enable-maintainer-mode was explicitly specified as part of the
configuration.
enjoy,
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC depending on perl?
2001-09-22 19:29 GCC depending on perl? Andrew Cagney
@ 2001-09-27 5:39 ` Alexandre Oliva
2001-09-27 8:37 ` Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Oliva @ 2001-09-27 5:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: gcc
On Sep 22, 2001, Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> wrote:
> I've noticed several recent changes to GCC have effectively added a
> dependency on PERL. Well, to be exact, it looks like configure probes
> for perl and certain features and then adjusts the build accordingly.
Perl is only used to build man pages. Man pages are included in
release tarballs, so perl is not needed to build releases. People
building off CVS are expected to have a complete build environment,
with all tools necessary to build files that are not in CVS.
> I'd have only expected such a dependency to be added when something
> like --enable-maintainer-mode was explicitly specified as part of the
> configuration.
--enable-maintainer-mode isn't described in the GNU Coding Standards
either. We're still trying to figure out what should be
maintainer-mode and what shouldn't, to draft up a section for the GCS,
open it up for discussion, and then adjust the GCC Makefiles to
comply. The current arrangement seems to be good enough for GCC
developers and random users, but it's certainly something people who
run the release scripts have to be concerned about, to make sure they
don't create tarballs with empty man-pages.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC depending on perl?
2001-09-27 5:39 ` Alexandre Oliva
@ 2001-09-27 8:37 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-09-27 10:57 ` Alexandre Oliva
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2001-09-27 8:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Oliva; +Cc: gcc
>> I've noticed several recent changes to GCC have effectively added a
>> dependency on PERL. Well, to be exact, it looks like configure probes
>> for perl and certain features and then adjusts the build accordingly.
>
>
> Perl is only used to build man pages. Man pages are included in
> release tarballs, so perl is not needed to build releases. People
> building off CVS are expected to have a complete build environment,
> with all tools necessary to build files that are not in CVS.
(I know about the pre-built manpages)
A user of a distribution gets different behavour and different results
depending on if and which perl they have installed. A distribution's
build behavour should be far more robust than that.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC depending on perl?
2001-09-27 8:37 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2001-09-27 10:57 ` Alexandre Oliva
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Oliva @ 2001-09-27 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: gcc
On Sep 27, 2001, Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> wrote:
> (I know about the pre-built manpages)
> A user of a distribution gets different behavour and different results
> depending on if and which perl they have installed.
No. If they get a release tarball, perl won't be used at all, because
the man-pages will have already been built, and their timestamps will
be correct. The problem is when you get a CVS tarball. You're
supposed to have a ``building environment'' for this to work, which
includes bison, autoconf, automake, perl and perhaps other tools I
forget now. These are not necessary for releases, though.
> A distribution's build behavour should be far more robust than that.
It is more robust than that. But that's the distribution, not the
random CVS snapshot.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-09-27 10:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-09-22 19:29 GCC depending on perl? Andrew Cagney
2001-09-27 5:39 ` Alexandre Oliva
2001-09-27 8:37 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-09-27 10:57 ` Alexandre Oliva
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).