Re: Time to update documentation regarding supported configuration styles?

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>]

I would be entirely in favor of removing official build-in-srcdir 
support.  A lot of problems are created by srcdir=objdir on multilibbed 
ports only.  They're usually really, really, irritating to find and fix, 
if it's even possible.  Yet worse, some, mystifyingly, only show up on 
native builds.

If people like, we could even make 'configure' complain if 
srcdir=objdir. :-)

>(BTW, I want to be quite clear: no offense to anyone doing that work
> and I fully support it but I hereby suggest again that it would be
> great if the people making *basic* reorganization and changes to the
> build infrastructure would actually test the multiple configuration
> styles we purport to support.)

Yes, it would be.  But I really can't promise to do this, because there 
are so *many* of them.  I try to keep a gcc native bootstrap, 
gcc cross, uberbaum native bootstrap, and uberbaum-sans-rda cross 
working.  (I also do build!=host tests but I still can't get 
the hang of them, and a lot of them were pre-broken.)  Adding 
build-in-src to that is really nasty, especially since it really means
I have to put another copy of the source tree on disk (to keep my 
working copy in any kind of shape for the objdir!=srcdir builds).

--Nathanael