This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: --disable-install-libiberty and libiberty.a
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: Matt Burgess <matthew at linuxfromscratch dot org>
- Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 06:13:21 -0700
- Subject: Re: --disable-install-libiberty and libiberty.a
- References: <1364546154 dot 20621 dot 23 dot camel at kyoto dot localdomain>
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Matt Burgess
<matthew@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
>
> 1) We currently assume that binutils is 'upstream' for libiberty
> development, and should therefore 'own' the libiberty.a file. Is that
> assumption correct?
No. The master sources for libiberty are in the GCC repository.
> 2) The --disable-install-libiberty configure switch for GCC does *not*
> suppress the installation of libiberty.a (see also [0] and [1]). It's
> unclear whether it should as the './configure --help' output only
> mentions the suppression of header installation, but libiberty.texi
> mentions the suppression of libiberty.a as well. Do folks here think
> that '--disable-install-libiberty' should suppress installation of the
> archive as well as the headers? If so, is the fact that it doesn't a
> GCC bug or a binutils bug (if the assumption in 1. above holds, I'd also
> assume that the copy of libiberty in GCC's source tree is taken verbatim
> from there, and therefore this is a binutils bug).
I agree that --disable-install-libiberty should prevent installing
libiberty.a. This would then be a GCC bug.
Ian