This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Why was sysdeps/sparc/Subdirs

To: drepper at cygnus dot com (Ulrich Drepper)
Subject: Re: Why was sysdeps/sparc/Subdirs
From: Greg McGary <greg at kayak dot mcgary dot org>
Date: 27 Jun 2000 09:18:14 -0700
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, libc-hacker at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
References: <20000627131204.N474@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <m3hfafums0.fsf@otr.mynet.cygnus.com>

Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> writes:

> Because `make dist' does not work otherwise.

Speaking of `make dist', Make-dist seems unnecessarily hairy.  A
couple weeks ago, I compared a dist tree with the list of all files
under CVS.  The only dist files that weren't under CVS were po/*.
There were about a dozen subtrees in CVS that weren't in dist, and
another handful of individual files.  IMO, `make dist' would be more
maintainable if we just derived the distribution-file list from a
filtered list of the contents of CVS.

Greg

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why was sysdeps/sparc/Subdirs
  - From: Ulrich Drepper

References:
- Why was sysdeps/sparc/Subdirs
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: Why was sysdeps/sparc/Subdirs
  - From: Ulrich Drepper

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]