This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: egcs 1.1b *-rtems
- To: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: egcs 1.1b *-rtems
- From: joel at OARcorp dot com
- Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:17:04 -0500 (CDT)
- cc: egcs at cygnus dot com
I should have asked... Does this mean the t-rtems patch is in and the
Makefile.in patch is in the pending queue?
--joel
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>
> In message <Pine.LNX.3.96.981014074505.15716E-100000@oar3remote.oarcorp.com>y
> ou write:
> > This did override INSTALL_ASSERT_H in the generated Makefile. But doing
> > this does not prevent the assert.h part of the stanza stmp-fixinc in
> > Makefile.in from being executed. It prevents the stanza install-assert-h
> > from running. It is possible that the path I conditionalized in
> > Makefile.in should not be there and the install-assert-h stanza alone
> > should do the install of assert.h. This would also fix the problem.
> You're absolutely correct. Sorry for being dense :-)
>
> > My impression was that something was inconsistent in the way the
> > INSTALL_ASSERT_H feature was installed.
> Yes.
>
>
> > I felt uncomfortable removing the assert.h code from stmp-fixinc since
> > this impacted every target. If you are more comfortable doing that, I am
> > happy with that solution. If that is the intent, it is the more correct
> > solution.
> I'll hold off on this one :-) If someone else wants to walk through the
> install targets and verify that the right thing will happen I'll apply their
> patch :-)
>
> jeff
>