From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.160.84]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50FC93858415 for ; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 22:48:58 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 50FC93858415 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E37FACCA4; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 23:48:57 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 21-HDF2h33cs; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 23:48:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (p50855d38.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.133.93.56]) (Authenticated sender: ro) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E600AC676; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 23:48:56 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE; s=20200306; t=1635806936; bh=IRUfDDqMIrz9j1H6pzCePpaeR1du5QPvPsLrVybrS4w=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=ktY+28TVUbsoLVG9Yl0PAqBej9GrBadeWhXZmTNqPY/JQBT+aR0xxkyHAjQlBvaqR 7f8kSe9s4UWh7iOnnqY6T0XIjw3xqhUdueuqUjBM6xSf5gQXQns9T85iJlNw3nAqwe +gSqwxApl/JJD9PgGjfGSomYhycw36ufN59wqYKIIck7udjA5fzWoCnwpXAQ2AW/+W F/nT4cAB9KNRBvfETLLUNWdSUZ56JdFtk1u3OEOLAqkNNTalNN3l8KccEpwrJg4tGW OfAg/6nKriey2roFLGDcoWsAdpV0YfiJZNnPWKLXRN/xftGdPR7AZezIRHfUVrbMAY OtBDW845rUEKw== From: Rainer Orth To: Andrea Monaco via Gdb Cc: simark@simark.ca, Andrea Monaco Subject: Re: gdb 11.1: configure doesn't check for gmp existence References: <87ilxb8qno.fsf@autistici.org> Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2021 23:48:56 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87ilxb8qno.fsf@autistici.org> (Andrea Monaco via Gdb's message of "Mon, 01 Nov 2021 23:19:55 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3789.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2021 22:49:00 -0000 Hi Andrea, > > Can you show the error you get? Normally, when you type "make" at > > the top-level that will run the configure script in the gdb > > directory, and that's when it should fail. > > Upon check, yes, that's what happens. But it's an unusual build system: > it's common to have Makefiles in subdirectories, while multiple > configures are less common. > > Anyway, if gmp is an essential dependency, why does the top-level > configure complete without it? it's also unlike GCC's gmp (and mpfr and mpc) detection which is done at the toplevel and errors out if one of the necessary components is either missing or too old. Not only does GDB use a different way of detecting support libraries, but also a less capable one than GCC's (cf. PR build/28332 for a regression caused by that). It's also confusing to users familiar with GCC's configure options for gmp etc. location: they are present but have no effect. Not the best user experience, I'd argue. Rainer -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University