Re: solaris bootstrap failure using cc for stage1, stab.h not found...

["Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>]

 > From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
 > 
 >   In message <199811231824.NAA03857@caip.rutgers.edu>you write:
 >   > 	When you say: "the idea of rerunning configure like this", do
 >   > you mean you don't like the way I implemented it, or do you mean you
 >   > don't like the idea of rerunning configure between stage 1 & 2?
 > 
 > I don't particularly like the idea of rerunning configure between
 > stages.  It introduces more subtle dependencies.


	If you would please list some specific concerns, I think that
might help me understand why this could be dangerous. 

(IMHO, rerunning configure before stage 2 is the right thing to do.
The stage1 autoconf test results are only relevant to the stage1
compiler.  If we can alleviate dependency concerns, I feel this is the
right direction.)


 > I'm not rejecting the idea, I'd just like us to think a little more
 > about the alternatives.
 > jeff

	I listed a couple of bad :-) alternatives in:

http://www.cygnus.com/ml/egcs-bugs/1998-Nov/0469.html

none of which I really like.  Eg. revert the STABS_H->STAB_H fix, or
put in a solaris specific hack.

	I would be happy to consider an alternative.  But
unfortunately no good ones occur to me...

		--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			Engagement Manager / Project Services
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu		Icon CMT Corp.