This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Add config/gxx-include-dir.m4 (patch 3/4 for PR 7305)
- From: Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at redhat dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 10:54:42 +0000
- Subject: Re: Add config/gxx-include-dir.m4 (patch 3/4 for PR 7305)
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org><email@example.com>
Alexandre Oliva <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Nov 25, 2004, Richard Sandiford <email@example.com> wrote:
>> * configure.in: Include config/gxx-include-dir.m4. Use
>> TL_AC_GXX_INCLUDE_DIR. Remove some now-redundant AC_SUBSTs.
>> * configure: Regenerate.
>> * gxx-include-dir.m4: New file.
> Looks good, but shouldn't gcc/ and libstdc++-v3/ use it as well?
FWIW, I touched on this in the 1/4 message, but (unhelpfully)
not in the one above the patch itself:
> This series of patches instead adds a new config/gxx-include-dir.m4
> fragment that can be shared between configure scripts. To avoid
> getting too sidetracked, the patches will only make ./configure and
> libjava/configure use this new fragment, so while there'll be no net
> increase in duplication, there'll unfortunately be no net reduction
The problem is that gcc/ wants to do something slightly different
and the libstdc++ code is bound up with other things. The changes
didn't look entirely mechanical.
> Or was this for 4/4, that I seem to not have received?
In case anyone else is wondering about that, 4/4 only affected
libjava, so I only posted it to libjava-patches. I should have
made that clearer, sorry.
> In case it wasn't clear: ok, please check it in :-)