This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3.0.4 builds for solaris 2.7 and 2.8
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- To: Brad Lucier <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 23 Feb 2002 02:23:10 -0300
- Subject: Re: 3.0.4 builds for solaris 2.7 and 2.8
- Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
- References: <200202230501.g1N511F08480@banach.math.purdue.edu>
On Feb 23, 2002, Brad Lucier <lucier@math.purdue.edu> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
> I meant that the top-level configure would be allowed to give a
> warning about a valid subconfigure option.
So what's the gain? User thinks he misspelled the option when he
didn't, or gets used to the warning and ignores it when it strikes for
real.
>> However, such patch wouldn't life very long, since we have a volunteer
>> autoconfiscating the top-level configure script.
> OK, does that mean I should stop discussing this, that it just won't be
> done?
Let's say that I wouldn't like to maintain this, but if you would,
feel free to contribute patches to enable this feature, and keep
watching gcc-patches for new configure flags to either remind people
to adjust the top-level configure or adjust it yourself :-)
--
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