MESSAGE
| DATE | 2021-01-27 |
| FROM | Joseph Myers
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Future plans for Autotools
|
On Wed, 27 Jan 2021, Richard Purdie wrote:
> Thanks, I hadn't realised. The only two recipes we never autoreconf are
> binutils and gcc, instead we do some painful things to handle libtool
> issues so we get our libtool tweaks. It sounds like we should revisit
> that. I guess we were so used to not being about to do it we never
> looked back at it recently.
>
> Does that mean those projects will autoreconf more regularly if there
> are autotools releases?
I'm likely to follow binutils+gdb in making autoconf/automake updates in
GCC.
libtool updates are trickier, and probably more relevant to GCC than to
binutils+gdb. GCC is using a 2009 version of libtool (reportedly commit
2c9c38d8a12eb0a2ce7fe9c3862523026c3d5622) with lots of local patches, some
of which may not be upstream (libtool upstream isn't very active), and
different interpretations of --with-sysroot mean that updating libtool in
GCC would also require reverting libtool commit
3334f7ed5851ef1e96b052f2984c4acdbf39e20c in the new version of the libtool
files used in GCC (in addition to making sure that any other
not-yet-upstream local libtool patches are preserved).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph-at-codesourcery.com
_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|
