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: [Ada] multilib patch take two => multilib build working

From: laurent at guerby dot net
To: Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at gmail dot com>
Cc: Arnaud Charlet <charlet at adacore dot com>, Olivier Hainque <hainque at adacore dot com>, gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at oarcorp dot com>, laurent at guerby dot net
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:03:54 +0200
Subject: Re: [Ada] multilib patch take two => multilib build working
References: <1216584523.18723.1218.camel@localhost> <48841268.9040104@gnu.org> <1216622175.18723.1231.camel@localhost> <1216725899.13357.23.camel@localhost> <4885C766.30504@gnu.org>

Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>:
> I'm not sure how much churn is there in gcc/ada/Makefile.in.  If there
> is little, it probably makes more sense to work on a branch.  If there
> is much, it probably makes more sense to commit the partially working
> patch.  Again, I'll defer to AdaCore people on this.

I can propose the purely mechanical rts => $(RTSDIR), stamp => stamp-$(RTSDIR)
patch separately, it has no visible effect and is much of the otherwise small
diff. (It already allows to build multiple rts easily from the command line in
the build tree which might be useful on its own.)

Arnaud, would that be okay for you?

Thanks in advance,

Laurent

References:
- [Ada] multilib first patch
  - From: Laurent GUERBY
- Re: [Ada] multilib first patch
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: [Ada] multilib first patch
  - From: Laurent GUERBY
- [Ada] multilib patch take two => multilib build working
  - From: Laurent GUERBY
- Re: [Ada] multilib patch take two => multilib build working
  - From: Paolo Bonzini

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