[Bug libgcj/37019] [4.2 Regression] Inconsistent gcc-4.2.3/libjava/configure uses "grep" and "egrep" and "grep -E" and "$EGGREP" but not ggrep -- sed also is trouble

["rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

------- Comment #7 from rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-08-05 06:50 -------
Rob, please let's not play ping pong with the severity of this bug.
Also, I haven't confirmed this one yet because while I see a couple
of problems, I don't see yet whether any of them is a regression
(this report is about the 4.2 branch which is in regression mode,
not trunk).

GCC does not assume that all commands are GNU commands, and that will
not change either.  GCC configury mostly assumes that available commands
respect POSIX with known limitations and bugs either listed in
gcc/doc/install.texi and/or in
<http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/html_node/Portable-Shell.html>

To your config.log diff: how exactly did you create the two differing
versions?  Asking because they were quite obviously called with a different
command line.  Did you call one of them directly, and the other was what a
'make' from the top level caused to use?  Or did you try to build one in
stage1 and one in a later stage?

Then, the differing 'uname -v' output has nothing whatsoever to do with sed
or grep.  It is created purely by a line like this:

  uname -v = `(uname -v) 2>/dev/null || echo unknown`

The reason that one configure run fails is that it determines the compiler
to use solaris threads rather than posix threads; this is a consequence of
one configure run being with gcc, and one with the previously built compiler.

IOW, I currently don't yet understand how any of the problems you have should
have to do with sed or grep or other tools at all.  Please stick to describing
the actual problems rather than what you perceive them to be caused by: If you
follow the installation instructions of GCC, then when and how does it fail,
and what is the first (not last!) error seen plus the commands that led to it?

Thanks,
Ralf


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37019