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: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support

From: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: Le-Chun Wu <lcwu at google dot com>, Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch dot net>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>, Taras Glek <tglek at mozilla dot com>, Grigori Fursin <grigori dot fursin at inria dot fr>, Zbigniew Chamski <zbigniew dot chamski at gmail dot com>, Sean Callanan <spyffe at cs dot sunysb dot edu>, Cupertino Miranda <cupertinomiranda at gmail dot com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 02:53:24 +0000
Subject: Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
References: <82091ad70902201351y79d58552nf90b2359d8b40e0a@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0902202251370.21964@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <82091ad70902231734q70230825q11ffedbf5109e7a7@mail.gmail.com> <82091ad70902231904j3bfbc2d9m373221db3963273@mail.gmail.com> <49A3B03E.2020201@starynkevitch.net> <82091ad70902241205m383e8ec9g1f6646f259a93bde@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0902242342500.28488@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>

Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Le-Chun Wu wrote:
> 
>> Sorry for including the auto-generated files in the code-review diff.
>> One thing I noticed about the auto-generated configure files is that,
>> besides the stuff that I added, there are actually some other
>> "formatting" differences in the auto-gen'ed configure files. I wonder
>> if I have to use some special flags/options when running 'autoconf'?
>> Or do people actually massage the files after they are generated?
> 
> You have to use autoconf built from unmodified FSF sources of the relevant 
> release, not any patched version installed as part of a GNU/Linux 
> distribution.

  To be precise: I was under the impression that meant autoconf-2.59 and
automake-1.9.6 precisely, at any rate until some potential future upgrade occurs?

I haven't seen it mentioned yet in the thread: Basile's notes about
regenerating files.

http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Regenerating_GCC_Configuration

    cheers,
      DaveK

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Ralf Wildenhues
- Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Tom Tromey

References:
- [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Le-Chun Wu
- Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Joseph S. Myers
- Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Le-Chun Wu
- Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Le-Chun Wu
- Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Basile STARYNKEVITCH
- Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Le-Chun Wu
- Re: [plugins] [patch] Initial implementation of GCC plugin support
  - From: Joseph S. Myers

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