This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
- From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden at doctormoo dot dyndns dot org>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com,dj at redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 16:42:53 -0400
- Subject: Autoconfiscation Status
After a second round of analysis, I find that allowing srcdir or
builddir to change locations between 'configure' and 'make' can't be
done in a way I'm happy with (a way that isn't too complex to
implement, too ugly, or too slow) *unless* I implement Per Bothner's
build scheme first, in which case I think it will become easy.
Since, following the recommondations of various people, all
subconfigures will be invoked by 'make', the advantages of doing
'configure' on one machine and 'make' on another become somewhat more
obscure. Top level configure by itself is very fast.
"Make install" is different. I *believe* that there are no
subdirectories whose 'install' targets make complicated references
to other subdirectories, use programs which might be built in the
tree, or other irritating things like that. I think the only programs
used by 'install' targets which are *in* the tree are "install-sh" and
libtool, both of which autoconf is quite good at finding. I think no
install target actually *uses* things like FLAGS_FOR_TARGET and
CC_FOR_TARGET. So I think that I don't need to use absolute paths for
anything used by 'install', and so it can be done in a relocated
directory; though I'm not sure.
So I'm leaning toward putting autoconfiscation on hold and starting to
implement the new build scheme.
But if people would rather I finish autoconfiscation and lose the
ability to move around between "configure", "make", and another "make"
(potentially regaining it later) then I'll go ahead and do that.