Re: [avr-llvm-devel] current status and future direction oftheavr-llvm project

[Weddington, E. <Eri...@at...>]

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Josef Eisl [mailto:za...@za...] 
> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 9:06 AM
> To: avr...@li...
> Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] current status and future 
> direction oftheavr-llvm project
> 
> > Or an alternative is that we (one of us at least) use those 
> specific versions and regenerate configure and commit that. I 
> worry about patching configure. I don't have a problem with 
> regenerating it.
> 
> I've the required versions installed and can commit the updated
> configure file. But, to be honest, I don't see why replacing configure
> is better than patching it or am I missing something?
> Anyway I think this is no big deal. Both ways are ok for me  :) .

It's more of a philosophical point: configure is a generated file, and typically not something that you patch like source code. We should regenerate the file in full. When we do the commit, the revision control system will take care of figuring out the diff.

But really it sounds like we'll work this out. I'm not worried.