Subject: bug#11034: Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option

From: Roumen Petrov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2012 00:26:29 +0300

Hi Stefano,

Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 04/02/2012 10:19 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Lattarini<[email-masked]>  writes:
>> Stefano>  It should still be possible, with the right hack (which is
>> Stefano>  tested in the testsuite, and required by other packages
>> Stefano>  anyway).  The baseline is: if you don't want your '.info' files
>> Stefano>  to be distributed, then it should be easily possible to have
>> Stefano>  them built in the builddir; but if you want them distributed,
>> Stefano>  they will be built in the srcdir.
>>
>> Now I am confused.  Is it possible to continue to work the way it does
>> today, or not?
>>
> The point is: if you want to have info files build in the builddir *and*
> distributed, than no, it won't be possible (without bending over backwards).
> But I still don't understand why it's a big deal to have the '.info' files
> placed in the srcdir *if you are going do distribute them*.

A lot of manual include path to executable. This path depend from vendor 
and OS. The correctly written documentation has to use proper paths
For instance /bin/sh is correct for most system but on some linux based 
OS-es it is /system/bin/sh .

So the rule to put into source tree generated files (documentation) 
prevent parallel build for multiple host or target platforms.

[SNIP]
Roumen