This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 17 Nov 2016 14:11, Simon Marchi wrote: > In gdb/, we are now making use of GNU make-specific features (in > particular, pattern rules), so we now require building with GNU make. > We based our decision on the fact that, for every platform on which we > are aware people build GDB on, GNU make is easily available. In fact, > according to the echoes we got, people already use gmake to build gdb > everywhere. > > Pedro determined that GNU make 3.81 was practically universally > available: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-11/msg00475.html > > Additionally, CentOS 6 (so probably RHEL6 as well) and Ubuntu 14.04 have > 3.81 in their repos. Just those two probably represent a significant > user base. So, unless we have a really good reason to require something > more recent, I think it makes sense to require GNU make >= 3.81. > > For simplicity and consistency, we were wondering if we should adopt the > same policy for the whole binutils-gdb tree. While not necessary, it > opens up the door to using GNU make-specific constructs in other > Makefiles in the tree, possibly improving readability and > maintainability. This change in GDB gives a good idea: > > http://tinyurl.com/hb8ozrz > > There was a discussion in 2014 that spun off another thread. Nobody > seemed against the idea, but there was no follow-up AFAICT: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2014-05/msg00263.html > > In the eventuality this proposition is accepted, should we have a check > in the top-level Makefile that warns the user early if their version of > make is not supported? seems like it should be adopted by gcc first ? for sim/, i have no problem having it follow gdb, although i was planning on converting it to automake ... -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |