Hello.
I see that binutils, GCC and GDB still use the Automake's 'cygnus' option
in some of their makefiles:
$ grep_cygnus() {
> grep -r 'cygnus' . \
>| perl -ne '/(^|[^@])cygnus($|(:!\.com\b))/ and print' \
>| grep -v '^[^:]*/Makefile\.in:'; \
> }
$ (cd ~/src/binutils && g
Hi Joseph, thanks for the feedback.
On 03/28/2012 01:24 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>
>> But this option is going to be deprecated in Automake 1.12.1 and removed in
>> Automake 1.13:
>>
>> <http://debbugs.gn
On 03/28/2012 02:29 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>
>> - texinfo.tex is not required if a Texinfo source file is specified. The
>> assumption is that the file will be supplied, but in a place that
>> Automake cannot
Hi Ian, Joseph, and sorry for the delay.
On 03/29/2012 01:43 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Stefano Lattarini writes:
>
>>> (I think avoiding info documentation being built in the source directory,
>>> so that builds could use a non-writable source directory, ma
Hi Alfred.
On 03/31/2012 11:08 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> - Have them distributed (automake's default). This means that
>they will be build in the srcdir, not in the builddir: of
>course, this only affects the maintainer, since for a user that
>builds the package f
On 03/28/2012 02:19 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> Hi Joseph, thanks for the feedback.
> On 03/28/2012 01:24 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>>
>> Is there better transition documentation somewhere?
>>
> Nope, but it would be a good idea to prepare it before starting to depr
On 03/31/2012 01:38 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 03/28/2012 02:19 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> Hi Joseph, thanks for the feedback.
>> On 03/28/2012 01:24 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>>>
>>> Is there better transition documentation somewhere?
>>&g
On 04/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Lattarini writes:
>
> Stefano> Note there's nothing I'm planning to do, nor I should do, in
> Stefano> this regard: the two setups described above are both already
> S
On 04/02/2012 05:16 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Lattarini writes:
>
> Stefano> True, and that was even stated in the manual; the whole point
> Stefano> of ditching support for cygnus trees is that by now those two
> Stefano>
On 04/02/2012 09:36 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Lattarini writes:
>
> Stefano> Sorry if I sound dense, but what exactly is the feature you are
> Stefano> talking about here?
>
> I was under the impression that it would n
On 04/02/2012 10:19 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Lattarini writes:
>
> Stefano> It should still be possible, with the right hack (which is
> Stefano> tested in the testsuite, and required by other packages
> Stefano> anyway)
acceptable to you.
Regards,
Stefano
>From de715b44d25ad523b558d7321ce87bcf8c0cdb09 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Message-Id:
From: Stefano Lattarini
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 22:02:55 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] texinfo: hack to allow '.info' files to be generated in the
builddir
The possibility to force the '.info&#
On 04/03/2012 10:04 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> OK, you've all made clear you have your sensible reasons to have the '.info'
> files generated in the builddir in your use cases. Since the actual change
> required by automake to allow this is very small and safe, I
On 04/03/2012 10:05 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 10:04 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> OK, you've all made clear you have your sensible reasons to have the '.info'
>> files generated in the builddir in your use cases. Since the actual change
>>
On 04/03/2012 10:39 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Lattarini writes:
>
> Stefano> On a second though, by double-checking the existing code, I
> Stefano> couldn't see how the 'cygnus' option could possibly influence
>
On 04/04/2012 01:53 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
> Pedro Alves writes:
>>> OK, you've all made clear you have your sensible reasons to have the '.info'
>>
>> ...
>>> it available only though the new, undocumented option named (literally)
>>> "hack!info-in-builddir". I hope this is acceptable to you.
>>
On 04/04/2012 03:17 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>
>> Note there's nothing I'm planning to do, nor I should do, in this regard:
>> the two setups described above are both already supported by the current
>> automake i
17 matches
Mail list logo
