This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Installation proposal
>>>>> "Per" == Per Bothner <email@example.com> writes:
Per> Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> What's good about this?
Per> 5. The Makefiles for builting libraries can be simpler: Just use
Per> "install/bin/g++", not "g++ -B... -nostdinc++ -I..." (This is a
Per> variant of your point 1.)
It's funny: that's precisely what does CVS Autoconf (and Bison and CVS
M4). Actually, we have wrappers in tests/ that point to the
non-installed executables, with all the needed magic for them to find
their peers and files.
As a result
1. the test suite runs autoconf etc. via the path, nothing is hard
2. so when `make check', we just have PATH go into tests/ first, and
the non installed tools are checked.
3. when `make distcheck' (i.e., dist + untar + configure
--prefix=/somewhere + make + make check + make install + make installcheck)
we have `installcheck' run the test suite on the installed tools
(by the past, I *did* have installed programs that didn't work, but
the non installed version did).
4. Bootstrapping is eased: Autoconf uses tests/autoconf,
tests/autom4te etc. without special flags. All the special tricks
are located in one single place: the wrappers.