Re: Problems with in-tree host libraries (gmp, ppl, etc)

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Even then, the ppl configury isn't detecting the gmp we just built.  It
>>> seems as though we should install gmp in a local temporary install tree
>>> and point ppl at that.  See below for a trace of the ppl configury as it
>>> attempts to detect an in-tree gmp (after applying the patch above).
>>> AG
>> I don't know if ppl was ever setup to detect/use an in-tree gmp.
> 
> No, it was not.  So you can drop in gmp/mpfr, or ppl/cloog, but not all
> four.

I would like to again suggest that we declare in-tree builds of this
stuff out of scope.  Build them up front, pass configure options to say
where they can be found, and declare victory.

As GCC depends on more external libraries, it gets harder and harder for
us to maintain this build system.  We all want to get the build system
to the point where we're doing "staged installs", instead of the current
mess -- but the more we put into the build system the more complex it
becomes.  I think we should leave the process of building and installing
components to packaging systems like RPM or .deb or Cygwin.

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713