On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 11:45:14PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Andrew Suffield: > > > On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 03:16:50PM -0600, Wesley J Landaker wrote: > >> GHDL is a VHDL compiler that's implemented as a stand-alone language > >> target for GCC. The way it's typically compiled is by: > >> > >> 1) Unpacking the latest GCC sources -- only gcc-core is necessary. > >> 2) Unpacking GHDL on top (adds 'vhdl' directory, no other modifications) > >> 3) Compile GCC with --enable-languages=vhdl > > > > This is a lunatic approach for an upstream to take. Granted that > > branching gcc is excruciatingly difficult - but distributing partial > > source really does suck. > > It's quite common in GCC-land, and I really don't see what's so wrong > with it. 8-) I didn't say it was uncommon, I said it was insane :P You get to spend ages juggling minor revisions of gcc and components, in the search of a combination that actually works. Upstream is essentially failing to perform any release management. It's notably common for gcc because so many research projects do this - and research projects notoriously perform no release management, but rather just release proof-of-concept code. Unfortunately people have a habit of copying this behaviour even when it's completely inappropriate. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature