Subject: Re: gcc/binutils/gdb import proposal
To: None <>
From: None <>
List: tech-toolchain
Date: 07/17/2000 21:56:42
> ***** SOURCE LAYOUT *****

Now, this is where I don't follow you. (Surprise! ;-)

It seems that you propose to tweak the distribution trees of the
various distributions before storing it somewhere in gnu/dist/.  I
thought one of the major points of the gnu/dist/ tree was to have a
place where the source could be stored "as originally distributed",
i.e. in its non-tweaked non-adapted form, partially to ease future
integration of new versions.

Then we have the non-dist directory tree under gnu/.  Here (and
elsewhere in the NetBSD source tree) the directory structure usually
closely mirrors the installation tree structure.  The proposal you
make seems to deviate fairly widely from this convention, in that you
among other things suggest building library bits and bits for libexec
in directories somewhere under gnu/usr.bin/gcc/.

I see that you say that you have had requests from several people to
group gcc's build structure in one tree.  What is the advantage of
doing that?

I've not done much work in this area, so there may be some things I
Just Don't Get here...


- H=E5vard