Subject: Re: Autoconf for toolchain "replacement library"?
To: Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: James Chacon <email@example.com>
Date: 11/13/2001 20:19:43
Or anytime someone adds a new tool/feature in which might be using something
else out of libutil/libc/etc.
Thats the problem (and I think Todd saw that well in wanting to add autoconf
here for this purpose). The counter-example of the checked in copy of the a.out
ld.so isn't good because given enough inclination one could recreate that
with the source in the tree.
>On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 04:28:03PM -0500, James Chacon wrote:
>> Well...No one said this is an optimal solution...
>> You can't go halfway. Having something which requires a regen in the tree
>> without also providing the tools to do the regen is just insane.
>Hum, I suspect you'll have to rerun autoconf only if you're not hosting
>on a NetBSD host. In which case, you'll have to install autoconf on the
>non-netbsd machine you're trying to build.
>Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>