This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: Updates to --with-sysroot support


On Nov  6, 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 04:04:04PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Nov  6, 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > It can't affect compiles within the build tree; this is only applied to
>> > the list of include directories in cpp_include_defaults.  None of those
>> > are originally pointing into the build tree.
>> 
>> Point is, when we run ./xgcc -B./, gcc takes ./ as bindir, and
>> tries to relocate everything else from that.

> But the only things it will relocate in this code are the in the
> installed copy of $(gcc_tooldir).  Should we be searching that from
> inside the build directory?  My hunch says no.

Point is it will relocate ${prefix}/include into say ../include.

>> > Blech, I knew I forgot something.  Yes, here's the install.texi patch;
>> > it deletes the unpleasant bit that got me started on this in the first
>> > place, and documents the relocation.
>> 
>> Err...  So is it going to be relocated even if it's outside
>> exec_prefix or prefix.  I don't like this.

> That's not changed by my patch: it will be relocated if the call to
> make_relative_prefix you added succeeds.  If that's not what you wanted
> in the first place then you should probably control it at that call
> site...

I think make_relative_prefix used to prevent such relocations, and I
believe you've now made it more lax in what it accepts and tries to
relocate.  But then, I may be entirely wrong in this assumption.  If
so, I apologize.

>> Err...  I don't see that.  I seem to have checked in both
>> gcc/configure.in and gcc/configure, and one was generated from the
>> other, without the bits I didn't mean to check in.

> Take a look at the diff between 1.630.4.3 and 1.630.4.4.

Eeek.   Oh, well, looks like my mistake just went away when someone
rebuilt configure next time.  Sorry about that.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer


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