This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: stupid build error
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Mike Stump wrote:
> A review of the change and approval of the change should be enough to
> catch issues going into the FSF tree. The build should just copy the
> generated file to the source tree, if changed. The build failed for me,
The rule from the FSF is that tm.texi is treated more like a source file
than a generated file, because no actual dual-licensing notice for
target.def could be produced (if it could, we wouldn't need a checked-in
tm.texi at all - checked-in generated files are only for cases where they
are needed in the bootstrap process or to reduce the external dependencies
for a build). Someone can write new text and put it in both places for
licensing in each source file under its respective license - the makefile
rules are providing a tool to assist someone choosing to do so and so
ensure that the source files target.def, tm.texi.in, tm.texi are kept in
sync in a way that we wish to keep them in sync. Or someone can copy
existing doc strings from tm.texi to target.def, or from comments to both
target.def and tm.texi, keeping the three files in sync in the desired
way, but with approval for the patch from one of the docstring relicensing
maintainers being required in that case.
Thus, the makefile rules are not rules for updating a generated file in
the usual sense - they are rules to assist developers, who have made a
conscious decision to put the same text in multiple source files under
different licenses, in making changes to those multiple source files in
sync with each other.
Perhaps the error message should be phrased differently to make clear that
it is about the three source files not being in sync with each other.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com