This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: configure.{in -> ac} rename (commit 35eafcc71b) broke in-tree binutils building of gcc
- From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich at suse dot com>
- To: "Alan Modra" <amodra at gmail dot com>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,<binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 07:32:32 +0100
- Subject: Re: configure.{in -> ac} rename (commit 35eafcc71b) broke in-tree binutils building of gcc
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <55A4EEC202000078000907FE at mail dot emea dot novell dot com> <20150715012040 dot GJ23655 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org>
>>> On 15.07.15 at 03:20, <amodra@gmail.com> 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 configure.in->configure.ac 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