This is the mail archive of the 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: libtool patch

On Nov 25, 2004, Benjamin Kosnik <> wrote:

> 1) you need to cc on libstdc++ patches. Please
> make a note of this. There are similar requirements for the java
> list and java patches.

A change to the top-level libtool.m4 is not a patch for libstdc++ or
libjava.  It sure may affect them, just like a change to the top-level
configure or Makefile might.  The fact that there's a copy of
a lot of the libtool.m4 contents in libstdc++/configure is just an
unfortunate result of the way libtool is implemented.  Simply
rebuilding configure is probably not worth posting a patch to in
libstdc++, but feel free to feel otherwise.

> 2) you need to send mail to gcc-patches on patches. I don't see
> something for these libtool changes.

There was a patch posted to the list, that I probably only reviewed
after a significant delay.  Someone mentioned Kelley hadn't rebuilt
some configure files.  Maybe someone else did and checked them in
without posting the corresponding patches or even adding ChangeLog

> 3) you need to bump AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE from 1.9.1 to 1.9.3, and
> regenerate configure.

Why is the bump needed?  Does the libtool patch introduce any
dependencies on automake 1.9.3?  I didn't think so.

> 4) you need to update the docs to reflect the versions of autotools used

That's just a consequence of the pointless 3).  If you want to bump it
up for other reasons, feel free, but just because someone uses
automake 1.9.3 to build aclocal.m4, which then affects configure, is
no reason (to me) to change the requirements, forcing anyone who cares
to upgrade a perfectly-functional automake.

In fact, if all that changed was the top-level libtool.m4, there's not
even a need to get automake involved.  aclocal.m4 doesn't have to be
rebuilt, because the top-level libtool.m4 is included by reference,
not by copy, and rebuilding configure doesn't involve automake in any
way whatsoever.

So what's your point?

Alexandre Oliva   
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{,}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{,}

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