GNU bug report logs - #11034
Removing 'cygnus' mode in the near future

Previous Next

Full log

Message #47 received at 11034 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Tom Tromey <tromey <at> redhat.com>
Cc: gcc <at> gcc.gnu.org, 11034 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, gdb <at> sourceware.org, iant <at> google.com,
	automake <at> gnu.org, ams <at> gnu.org, binutils <at> sourceware.org,
	joseph <at> codesourcery.com
Subject: Re: bug#11034: Binutils, GDB, GCC and Automake's 'cygnus' option
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 17:03:55 +0200

On 04/02/2012 04:25 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Stefano" == Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com> writes:
> 
> Stefano> Note there's nothing I'm planning to do, nor I should do, in
> Stefano> this regard: the two setups described above are both already
> Stefano> supported by the current automake implementation (but the last
> Stefano> one is not encouraged, even though it makes perfect sense in
> Stefano> some *rare* situations).  I was just pointing out that you have
> Stefano> to choose one of these setups -- so, if you want to distribute
> Stefano> info files, you must accept to have them build in the srcdir.
> 
> Or we can just stick with an older version of automake.
> It seems to me that this is the sensible approach.
>
> Or move to some other build system; either autogen-based or just
> requiring GNU make features.
>
<shameless plug>

  In this later case, you might want to take a look at the Automake-NG fork,
  started by myself (and still in a VERY early stage):

   - https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/automake-ng

  Fork which will possibly be the subject of the oncoming Google summer of
  code:

   - http://www.gnu.org/software/soc-projects/ideas-2012.html#automake

</shameless plug>

> The latter is fine for GCC but I'm not sure whether all the src projects
> are on board.
> 
> I'm pretty disappointed that automake would make this change.  I realize
> these choices may (arguably) make the most sense for most projects, but
> the gcc and src trees are not like most projects; and really the whole
> 'cygnus' feature is there just to support these two big users.
>
True, and that was even stated in the manual; the whole point of ditching
support for cygnus trees is that by now those two big users are basically
not making any real use of the 'cygnus' option anymore.  To quote my
previous report:

    And as of today, almost any use of the 'cygnus' option has disappeared
    from the GCC and GDB trees; for example, the command:

      grep cygnus `find -name '*configure*' -o -name '*[Mm]akefile*' \
                        -o -name '*.am' -o -name '*.mk'`

    yields this in the GCC tree:

      ./zlib/Makefile.am:AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = 1.8 cygnus
      ./zlib/Makefile.in:AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = 1.8 cygnus

    and this in the GDB tree:

      ./bfd/doc/Makefile.in:AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = 1.9 cygnus
      ./bfd/doc/Makefile.in:# cygnus option.
      ./bfd/doc/Makefile.am:AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = 1.9 cygnus
      ./bfd/doc/Makefile.am:# cygnus option.
      ./etc/configure.texi:option of @file{/usr/cygnus/@var{release}}, where @var{release} is the
      ./etc/configure.texi:@file{/usr/cygnus/@var{release}/H-@var{host}}, where @var{host} is the
      ./etc/configure.texi:AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = cygnus
      ./etc/configure.texi:AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = cygnus 1.3
      ./etc/configure.texi:@cindex canadian cross in cygnus tree
      ./etc/configure.texi:@cindex cygnus configure

Regards,
  Stefano

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.