This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC] Update to current automake/autoconf/libtool versions.

As far as I can tell offhand, none of the other patches depend on libiberty being updated, so one option is to upgrade the other directories, and leave libiberty alone.

The downside of this is that gcc/binutils folks now need to keep multiple versions of the tools around, and I imagine it would play hell with --enable-maintainer-mode.

In what way is it a bad time to change libiberty? I'm not arguing with the statement, just trying to understand the constraints a bit better. Would it be possible to convert the libiberty on the bib-branch, and import the binutils/gdb version from there?

On Thursday, December 5, 2002, at 11:28 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:

There is a problem with libiberty and utils because GCC have their
feet stuck in the ice
Plus the libiberty master *is* gcc, so you can't apply the patches to
just the src side anyway.  The libiberty in src is a "mere copy" of
the one in gcc.  You must apply libiberty patches to gcc either at the
same time or before applying them to src (and now is a bad time to
change gcc's libiberty).

Utils is not part of gcc.

(unless src, again splits off from GCC, but I suspect here we don't
want to).
Sorry, won't happen for libiberty.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]