This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RANLIB passed down for target libraries not as RANLIB_FOR_TARGET?
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Subject: RANLIB passed down for target libraries not as RANLIB_FOR_TARGET?
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Date: 26 Sep 2001 18:13:12 -0300
- Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
I don't know why this used to be like that, but it's clearly wrong.
It probably seldom showed up because RANLIB is often unnecessary these
days, and so a blank or `:' RANLIB generally works. However, that's
no excuse to not do it right, especially when it causes the gperf
build to fail.
I have mixed feelings about keeping the XFOO hack in. While
RANLIB_FOR_TARGET is never set to a blank string in the Makefile, it
might be passed as such in the command line. But I'd rather require
it to be passed as `:', otherwise gperf would still break. Comments?
Meanwhile, I'm checking this in.
Index: ChangeLog
from Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
* Makefile.in (EXTRA_TARGET_FLAGS): Pass RANLIB_FOR_TARGET for
RANLIB.
Index: Makefile.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/egcs/Makefile.in,v
retrieving revision 1.86
diff -u -p -r1.86 Makefile.in
--- Makefile.in 2001/09/21 05:09:09 1.86
+++ Makefile.in 2001/09/26 21:08:10
@@ -450,7 +450,7 @@ EXTRA_TARGET_FLAGS = \
'LIBCFLAGS=$$(LIBCFLAGS_FOR_TARGET)' \
'LIBCXXFLAGS=$$(LIBCXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET)' \
'NM=$$(NM_FOR_TARGET)' \
- "`echo 'RANLIB=$(RANLIB)' | sed -e s/.*=$$/XFOO=/`" \
+ 'RANLIB=$$(RANLIB_FOR_TARGET)' \
'WINDRES=$$(WINDRES_FOR_TARGET)'
TARGET_FLAGS_TO_PASS = $(BASE_FLAGS_TO_PASS) $(EXTRA_TARGET_FLAGS)
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me