[haible@ilog.fr: [patch] make install]

[Paul Koning]

>>>>> "Craig" == Craig Burley <burley@gnu.org> writes:

 >> In message < 199801071751.MAA23957@melange.gnu.org >you write: > [Is
 >> this a reasonable thing for language to do, in general?  If so, >
 >> it might be worth considering for all of them.]  > [ ... ] > When
 >> I take the full egcs snapshot, configure it in a separate
 >> directory, > change the LANGUAGES line in the Makefile to not
 >> include "f77", then > "make" will succeed but "make install" will
 >> fail because it tries to > install the nonexistent file
 >> "f/g77.info*". Here is a fix: I don't think we want to try and
 >> deal with this that late in the configure/build process.
 >> 
 >> I'd prefer we have some option to disable a language that exists
 >> in the source tree.  ie -- --disable-fortran or some such.
 >> 
 >> Other thoughts?

 Craig> I'm not sure offhand if "make LANGUAGES=... bootstrap", for
 Craig> example, implies that "make LANGUAGES=... install" must be
 Craig> done.

Yes it does.  And that's a constant hassle.  It would make vastly more
sense for "make install" to mean "install what I built" and especially
for it to install only the languages I asked for.  That means "make
all" or "make bootstrap" or the like have to save the LANGUAGES
specification, but that's a small price to pay to avoid the confusion
caused by the current situation.

It's even somewhat worse with "make cross" which implies a subset of
languages.  If you then do "make install" it doesn't work right at
all, instead it throws up all over itself trying to build cross-g77
which is known not to work.

	paul