This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: autoconf between stages. was: java fails to build
- To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>
- Subject: Re: autoconf between stages. was: java fails to build
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at hurl dot cygnus dot com>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 19:33:38 -0700
- cc: egcs at cygnus dot com, robertlipe at usa dot net
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <199901301841.NAA00406@caip.rutgers.edu>you write:
>
> I don't think kenner added it explicitly. I believe the
> `inline' test is a by-product of the intl stuff. In aclocal.m4, the
> AM_GNU_GETTEXT macro does AC_REQUIRE([AC_C_INLINE]) which calls the test
> for the inline keyword, iff it hasn't been run already.
Quite possible.
> Forgive me for saying so, but the approach below is completely
> wrong. The file config.in is a generated file. If you remove the line
> handling `inline' from config.in, it'll be reinserted the next time
> someone patches configure.in and runs autoheader.
Yup. I doubt he was suggesting it be included as-is.
> IMHO we need to do exactly what I said in my last message, which
> is to test for inline for the stage1 compiler and assume gcc has it for
> stage2 and later. Give me a little time and I'll work something out
> hopefully today or tomorrow and create a patch.
Let's look for a reasonably simple solution to get us through to egcs-1.2,
then plan on ripping the build procedure apart and reimplementing it from
the ground up between egcs-1.2 and egcs-1.3.
As Robert mentioned privately (and I agree) we've got hacks on top of hacks,
on top of workarounds, etc. I'm not really prepared to rip apart the build
tree yet, so another hack to hold us over a little while, then we sit down
and do it right (and likely break the tree for a while in the process).
jeff