Re: Now GCC is really hosed...

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

 > From: Bruce Korb <bkorb@sco.COM>
 > 
 > Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
 > > Removing files generated by such tools from CVS will strictly reduce the
 > > ability of folks like Kaveh or myself to continually test GCC on not-so-
 > > common platforms (as we are often using guest accounts with limited disk
 > > space to do so, for example).
 > 
 > Ah, here is the point where I have to be clearer than clear.  :-)
 > Mark Mitchell removed files from CVS.  I am proposing to RE-install
 > them, only to install them in a different place.  Further, all the
 > non-platform specific generated files would be so moved.
 > At configure time, it would be determined whether or not the
 > tools exist to regenerate these files.  If so, then at build
 > time the CVS generated files would be ignored and these files
 > would be regenerated during build.  If not, then the Makefiles
 > would be told to use a script to fetch the files out of the
 > CVS gen tree.  Nobody is saying you would have to have my
 > wierdo AutoGen thingey to build GCC from CVS.  Though I am saying
 > that the CVS server would have to have that tool.

I'm glad we won't be required to have these tools everywhere.  Gerald
is right, it would substantially reduce my ability to test various
platforms.

Q: If you are going to reinstall the generated files, why introduce
the extra Makefile hair to sometimes create them and sometimes copy?
Why not just always copy them from the gen dir?

		--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			Engagement Manager / Project Services
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu		Qwest Internet Solutions