[patch, 4.6/4.7] fix installation of plugin header files
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
Fri Jun 24 21:08:00 GMT 2011
On Fri, 24 Jun 2011, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 06/20/2011 05:18 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >
> >> - PR45078; vxworks-dummy.h is included for cpu_type in arm,
> >> i386, mips, sh and sparc but only installed when it's i386; copy it
> >> manually anytime.
> >
> > I don't think you should list particular config/ headers in PLUGIN_HEADERS
> > in Makefile.in; provide a way for targets to specify their additions to
> > this list in config.gcc instead. Is the issue headers that are directly
> > #included from tm.h headers (for whatever reason) rather than listed in
> > tm_file? (Some of those #includes may be avoidable, but the .def ones
> > probably do need listing explicitly.)
> >
> > The aim should be to get the extra files in tm_file_list, which is
> > included in PLUGIN_HEADERS, so that they appear in $(TM_H) dependencies as
> > well.
>
> updated patch attached.
That doesn't sufficiently address the issues I pointed out.
* Listing arm-cores.def in Makefile.in is still wrong.
* If you add a header to tm_file (which needs a more detailed analysis of
why including it there in the list of headers is safe for all targets
affected) then you should also remove the #include directives that
directly include it from other headers.
* There are other files included in tm.h headers that this patch is silent
on.
I believe you don't need to do anything about headers listed in
HeaderInclude in a .opt file that are also explicitly #included. Apart
from those, all #include directives in tm.h headers should be
investigated. If they can be replaced by entries in tm_file, by all means
do so, but if not, then *don't* add them explicitly to Makefile.in,
provide a way for them to get into tm_file_list in the Makefile without
them getting into tm_include_list there (which may mean a new config.gcc
variable). This new mechanism is where arm-cores.def and other such
headers should be listed - not directly in Makefile.in.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list