On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 13:32 +0900, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > 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? > If I have to do it, I'll prepare the patch to move the test instead.
Also we have got a bug report about an user not having a zip program or jar installed and they did not read the documentation so I pointed it to them. They then complained how we did not check early enough. This was after an hour or two of compiling. So having this check at the toplevel seems correct, maybe someone should add a plugin for the toplevel configure so we don't end up in a case where they compile for hours and then find out they need a program or a library installed. For right now I say we keep this at the toplevel until that gets solved. Thanks, Andrew Pinski
