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: missing libtool sources?

From: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de>
To: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
Cc: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>, libtool-patches at gnu dot org, schwab at suse dot de, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:18:24 +0200
Subject: Re: missing libtool sources?
References: <200708020233.l722XnNr025315@greed.delorie.com> <jesl72wcjx.fsf@sykes.suse.de> <200708021509.l72F99Dd000606@greed.delorie.com> <20070806211901.GD7874@ins.uni-bonn.de> <46C3F74B.9040909@gnu.org>

Hello Paolo,

* Paolo Bonzini wrote on Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 09:05:47AM CEST:
>> I think we should adjust the Libtool sources in this case. [...]

>> Would this patch eliminate further doubts?  If no, could you suggest an
>> improvement?
>
> It does look like a good idea.

Thanks.  I applied that.

Cheers,
Ralf

	* Makefile.am (edit): Do not warn against manual editing for the
	generated files libtool, libtoolize, libltdl/m4/ltversion.m4,
	tests/defs, as they are still in a preferred source code form as
	required by GPL.
	Report by DJ Delorie.

References:
- missing libtool sources?
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: missing libtool sources?
  - From: Andreas Schwab
- Re: missing libtool sources?
  - From: DJ Delorie
- Re: missing libtool sources?
  - From: Ralf Wildenhues
- Re: missing libtool sources?
  - From: Paolo Bonzini

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