On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> > But this is a different case as this error is for users rather than
> > developers.
> > So instead of getting an error early before compiling, we get an error 10
> > to 20
> > minutes later and users get upset that they get an error this late for
> > something
> > which could have been found early on.
>
> That is a problem with running configure at make time in general. If we
> add some kind of plugin system for configure fragments, it might fly.
> As the thing stands now, it is not a good-enough reason to pollute the
> toplevel code.
>
> We are not maintainers anyway, so we cannot ask anybody to do anything.
> Kaveh might or might not prepare a patch to move the test, and if he
> does, it will be up to the maintainers to decide who they agree with.
> Paolo
I'm more content with the gmp check at the top level and don't plan to
submit a change to that. Although I agree if this configure is shared
between binutils, gdb and gcc, and you're not compiling gcc, then it
shouldn't require gmp. So maybe something like your "test -d" fragment
would be appropriate. Would you please submit that one line change for a
configury maintainer to review?
Thanks,
--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
