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: [patch, toplevel] --enable-multilib*S* is an easy typo to recognize...

On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 06:25:12PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Feb 15, 2004, Phil Edwards <phil@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 02:37:36AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> Consider that we drop into the top level a new package that takes
> >> --enable-multilibs as an argument?
> 
> > Ew.  I would hope we would point to gcc's spelling and say, conform or die.
> 
> Why should an unrelated package conform to GCC's spelling?

Because it's going in our tree?

> It doesn't even have to be *our* top level.

Huh?  Our top level is the one under discussion.  I'm not patching top level
directories anywhere else.


Enh, never mind.  I'll leave it in my local tree.

-- 
America may be unique in being a country which has leapt
from barbarism to decadence without touching civilization.
  - John O'Hara
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]