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.

I really would like to see the tree using autoconf 2.5x as soon as possible; if this can be done before I autoconfiscate the top level (which is not autoconfiscated yet) it will save me an awful lot of trouble, since I can then use autoconf 2.5x for that autoconfiscation. :-/

Your patch as is updates
bfd binutils gas gdb gprof ld mmalloc opcodes rda sim utils

Can you please work up a patch for gcc 3.4 to update
boehm-gc fastjar gcc libf2c libffi libiberty libjava libobjc libstdc++-v3 zlib
Just a step back here. Some of the directories listed below belong to the FSF, but some don't. I don't think anyone can be asking Klee to update non FSF code. That's why I asked Klee to drop RDA from the original list.

And a patch for Insight
itcl libgui

And one for Dejagnu
dejagnu expect

And for Newlib & Cygwin
libgloss newlib winsup

And one for

and one for

However, I think that it's OK to update one directory at a time, provided we specify clearly what's going on, and get it all done before the next release of anything.
I don't think we can guarentee that, but I think we can live with the consequences :-/

Accordingly, I suggest getting clean patches for small sets of directories, making sure they work, getting them reviewed, and then putting them in; and then starting on the next set. Keep sending update
notices to the various lists regarding which directories use the 'new' tools and which use the 'old'. If you can make scripts which work correctly under *both* autoconf 2.5x *and* autoconf 2.13, by all means do so *first*, and mark those scripts as "compatibile with both", of course; but I expect that will only happen for the simplest directories.

If this is acceptable to other people in the various groups of course.

I expect this will generate a certain amount of breakage, but then so did my changes. In both cases, it needs to be done, we just have to make sure all the breakage gets fixed.


It was mentioned that autoconf2.5 scripts will have trouble with building because of the top level passing down --target unconditionally.

Unfortunately I think some other aspects of the configure scripts require --target to be passed down unconditionally. :-/ Otherwise I'd just change it.

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