From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/6] xen: systemd support Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 10:33:45 +0100 Message-ID: <53D76A79.5020207@citrix.com> References: <1406340860-8547-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> <1406551592.14628.15.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <53D67FBB.8030106@citrix.com> <53D68114.5020608@citrix.com> <20140728170015.GG21930@wotan.suse.de> <20140728183311.GJ21930@wotan.suse.de> <1406624040.20809.6.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XC3n4-0002gn-88 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:33:50 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1406624040.20809.6.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell , "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, "Luis R. Rodriguez" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 29/07/14 09:54, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Mon, 2014-07-28 at 20:33 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >>> Did you run autogen.sh? >> Actually you should not need to, odd. > Indeed, I did this on commit. > >> mcgrof@ergon ~/devel/xen (git::staging)$ rm -f config/Paths.mk >> mcgrof@ergon ~/devel/xen (git::staging)$ ./configure | grep Paths >> config.status: creating config/Paths.mk >> >> What do you see? > Perhaps Andrew is running "cd tools ; ./configure"? > > In http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2014-07/msg03156.html I > posited that nobody would be doing that (even going so far to doubt that > it worked) but if Andrew is doing it then clearly I was wrong and we > will need to rethink the approach. Oh - indeed I am; It certainly did use to work. At some point in the past, the outer ./configure was a small shell script which cd'd into tools and ran ./configure, and I got into the habit of only ever running ./configure from the tools subdir. > > If we need to support direct invocation of "sub" configure then the only > approach which comes to my mind is to generate per-subsystem Paths.mk, > e.g. in each of the sub-configures do: > AC_CONFIG_FILES("../config/Tools-Paths.mk:../config/Paths.mk.in") > along with the other stuff[0] and adjusting the Makefile to use it, > substituting Tools as needed for other subsystems of course. Hmm - I have mixed opinions about this. On the one hand, it would be nice for sub configures to work, but splitting Paths.mk like this seems like a recipe for subtle issues. Would it be possible for a sub configure to detect its dependencies and request that the outer ./configure gets run? ~Andrew > > I think you will also need to -include rather than include so that make > clean et al work on an unconfigured tree. There is existing logic in the > all the (I think) right places to deal with non-clean targets needing > configure to have been run. > > BTW, I noticed the opposite problem to Andrew, which is that Paths.mk is > not removed by "make clean". > > Ian. > > [0] > https://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.69/html_node/Configuration-Files.html says that the : syntax lets you override the input. >