This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: Add zlib source to src CVS resposity
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GDB <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:12:49 -0700
- Subject: Re: RFC: Add zlib source to src CVS resposity
- References: <AANLkTikYSxV51_452Wuqox6mQ3_QwNjzNkBgV=NzKk4f__16997.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <AANLkTinR-RO0RpKPsSi9E5uUytGaxH-g1bwjRVLMx_V2@mail.gmail.com>
"H.J. Lu" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <email@example.com> wrote:
>> firstname.lastname@example.org (Frank Ch. Eigler) writes:
>>> "H.J. Lu" <email@example.com> writes:
>>>> [...] ÂBy default, the in-tree zlib is used. ÂIf you configure
>>>> binutis using --with-system-zlib, system zlib will be used. Â[...]
>>> Can you summarize what modern platforms lack a system zlib, and what
>>> justifies using the proposed in-tree copy by default?
>> This is a good point. ÂWe need zlib in the gcc repository because we
>> build it for the target, but this issue does not arise in the src
>> repository. ÂSo this becomes a question for the binutils maintainers: do
>> the binutils want to be self-contained, or do they want to follow the
>> path of gcc and require additional libraries to be installed before a
>> build can succeed?
> zlib is in similar situation as intl. We include intl in binutils src and
> it can be disabled at configure time. For host zlib, should we check if
> it is available and fail back to in-tree zlib if there is no suitable host
I assume that the reason we do that for intl is because it has complex
interactions with the rest of the C library, so using the wrong intl
library will cause confusing behaviour when the LC_ environment
variables are set. That case does not arise for zlib. I think that if
we do ship zlib with the binutils, we might as well always build it
rather than using complex configure tests.
This is just my opinion, and really I think the more active binutils and
gdb maintainers should decide what to do here.