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: configure.{in -> ac} rename (commit 35eafcc71b) broke in-tree binutils building of gcc

Sorry to be sending this message 3 times, just wanted to put a message
on the 3 related patches submitted.

See updated (to current trunk/master) gcc patch from one I submitted
on May 24 at:
See updated (to current trunk/master) binutils-gdb patch from one I
submitted on May 24 at:

Both attached to this email for convenience.

They rename the left over files to in
binutils-gdb.  (Some were missed when the others were changed.)

They update all references (even in documentation) to to in both binutils-gdb and gcc -- so combined builds work
great again.

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 2:32 AM, Jan Beulich <> wrote:
>>>> On 15.07.15 at 03:20, <> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:13:06AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> (there doesn't seem
>>> to be a fix for this in gcc trunk either, which I originally expected I could
>>> simply backport).
>> The> rename happened over a year ago so I
>> guess this shows that not too many people use combined binutils+gcc
>> builds nowadays.  I've always found combined binutils+gcc builds not
>> worth the bother compared to simply building and installing binutils
>> first, as Jim suggests.
> That doesn't work well when you want to specifically avoid
> installing, instead running directly from the build tree.
> Jan

Description: Binary data

Description: Binary data

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