CVS-19990122: PATCH for texinfo
Manfred Hollstein
manfred@s-direktnet.de
Sun Jan 31 02:34:00 GMT 1999
On Sat, 30 January 1999, 08:34:34, law@hurl.cygnus.com wrote:
>
> In message <Pine.GSO.4.05.9901272314480.35-100000@markab.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>yo
> u write:
> > In general, this texinfo stuff seems to cause quite some problems,
> > so it may be useful to consider the various options we have:
> >
> > 1. Remove texinfo from the egcs tree and require a current version of
> > texinfo to be installed.
> >
> > This will solve all problems of this kind, however it'll make egcs
> > more "expensive". In addition we will have to check that the installed
> > version is sufficiently up-to-date.
> >
> > 2. Remove texinfo from the egcs tree and install the documentation only
> > if texinfo is found.
> >
> > 3. Keep texinfo and try to fix problems. That means, for example, that we
> > will have to keep the util subdirectory in order to get install-info
> > and install your patch (or something similar).
> >
> > 4. Remove texinfo from the egcs tree and require it for CVS users, but
> > deliver pre-compiled *.info files in snapshots and releases.
> >
> > (That won't solve the need for install-info, though -- in the absence
> > of an installed version of install-info -- we could simply copy the
> > *.info files.)
> I would lean towards #4. With the caveat that we don't bother with
> install-info. I just don't see the benefits outweigh the need to add more
> complication to the makefile.
>
> One thing I would like to look at between egcs-1.2 and egcs-1.3 is to greatly
> simplify gcc/Makefile. IMHO, it's not managable in its current state. Many
> things are obsolete. Others can be made obsolete by updating some targets.
>
> Once we clean up gcc/Makefile we should proceed up a level and look at the
> toplevel configury and Makefiles.
>
> I guess in general, I find that we've got a mess of code, some of which is
> merely working around problems with work arounds of a bad design.
>
> jeff
While I agree to this long-term strategy wrt texinfo, how about my initial
patch?
1999-01-23 Manfred Hollstein <manfred@s-direktnet.de>
* util/Makefile.am (noinst_PROGRAMS): Renamed from "bin_PROGRAMS"
to avoid installing anything.
(noinst_SCRIPTS): Likewise.
* util/Makefile.in: Regenerate using automake-1.3.
manfred
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list