Re: [patch] 6/n: trans-mem: runtime

2011-11-07 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Torvald Riegel wrote: > On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 23:04 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Torvald Riegel wrote: > > > > > Is the attached patch what you'd like to see? It doesn't yet use the > > > > It's plausible, but really a build system maintainer should l

Re: [patch] 6/n: trans-mem: runtime

2011-11-06 Thread Torvald Riegel
On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 23:04 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Torvald Riegel wrote: > > > Is the attached patch what you'd like to see? It doesn't yet use the > > It's plausible, but really a build system maintainer should look at it. > So, can we keep this as-is then and fix

Re: [patch] 6/n: trans-mem: runtime

2011-11-06 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Torvald Riegel wrote: > Is the attached patch what you'd like to see? It doesn't yet use the It's plausible, but really a build system maintainer should look at it. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: [patch] 6/n: trans-mem: runtime

2011-11-06 Thread Torvald Riegel
On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 20:15 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Thu, 3 Nov 2011, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > > Index: libitm/acinclude.m4 > > === > > --- libitm/acinclude.m4 (.../trunk) (revision 0) > > +++ libitm/acinclude.m4

Re: [patch] 6/n: trans-mem: runtime

2011-11-06 Thread Torvald Riegel
On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 20:15 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > Do you need a FLAGS_TO_PASS setting as in > ? (The way to > test is to do a multilib build and install, passing infodir=/some/where on > the "make install" line, and see if the m

Re: [patch] 6/n: trans-mem: runtime

2011-11-03 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > Index: libitm/acinclude.m4 > === > --- libitm/acinclude.m4 (.../trunk) (revision 0) > +++ libitm/acinclude.m4 (.../branches/transactional-memory) > (revision > 180773) >