This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: bug#11034: Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option
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 from a tarball those files should *not* be
> rebuilt, hence there is no problem even if the user's srcdir is
> read-only.
>
> This has always been the right way to do things.
>
> - Don't distribute the generated info files. [...] In this
> case, the user will have to to have the 'makeinfo' program
> available to build them.
>
> Please don't do this, it causes all kinds of headaches, like the small
> fact that makeinfo will now be required to bootstrap.
>
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 implementation (but the last one is not encouraged, even though
it makes perfect sense in some *rare* situations). I was just pointing
out that you have to choose one of these setups -- so, if you want to
distribute info files, you must accept to have them build in the srcdir.
Regards,
Stefano
- References:
- Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option
- Re: Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option
- Re: Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option
- Re: Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option
- Re: bug#11034: Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option
- Re: bug#11034: Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option