This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: 3.0.4 builds for solaris 2.7 and 2.8


On Feb 23, 2002, Brad Lucier <lucier@math.purdue.edu> wrote:

> OK, how about a warning from the top-level configure for options it
> can't recognize?

It would be a maintenance burden to whoever modifies any of the
sub-packages' set of supported options.

The whole point of --with/--without and --enable/--disable flags in
configure is that it's open-ended, such that you can use the same set
of flags for any packages you build (unless they happen to use the
same flag for totally different purposes), such that you can create a
single wrapper configure script (like the one in gcc) that passes the
same flags to all of the sub-packages without being concerned with
their meaning.  It's up to each package to interpret the flags it
recognizes and ignore those that it doesn't.

That said, I'll give you that the set of configure options accepted by
each sub-package doesn't change very often, so it wouldn't be that
much of a maintenance burden.  So I wouldn't oppose a patch that
implemented the feature you suggest.

However, such patch wouldn't life very long, since we have a volunteer
autoconfiscating the top-level configure script.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]