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: toplevel commits [was Re: Fix make -j4 installs]


> That reminds me.  It's even a make -j problem, so fits under this
> thread.  DJ, would you please review the following patch?  There's an
> alternate patch in a followup.
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-10/msg01262.html

I don't like the syntax of that particular patch; I'd rather see an
explicit if/then/fi than use && to conditionalize such a large chunk
(the case statement).  Otherwise it just looks weird.

The MAINT follow up is wrong; Makefile.in is generated so you have to
work through the Makefile.tpl and Makefile.def files.  Otherwise, the
syntax is fine.

I don't think we're unconditionally moving away from Makefile
fragments, but we're trying to restrict them to cases where it really
makes sense, and use them wisely.  This is clearly one of those cases.

So this patch is OK if it's fixed to use the tpl/def files:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-10/msg01314.html


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