[Gc] Should libatomic_ops be inside bdwgc?

Ivan Maidanski ivmai at mail.ru
Wed Aug 10 09:34:21 PDT 2011

Hi Hans and Petter,

I have moved libatomic_ops out of bdwgc repo recently.
So, if you want to compile bdwgc, you need to have libatomic_ops repo inside bdwgc's one.
The question is for the future - whether to have libatomic_ops in bdwgc release tar-ball or not?

Hans -
What do you think which distribution variant should be best (at least for gc72)?
In other words, do we still need "EXTRA_DIST += libatomic_ops"?
I see only that we shouldn't disable bdwgc configure & make with no libatomic_ops installation.

Petter -
1. Based on the answer from Hans, could you prepare the relevant patch for the scripts (including any other things you think need adjusting, if any)? Thanks.

2. The problem really in libatomic_ops itself (that is, I did "make distcheck" in it with the same result).


10 08 2011, 10:15 Petter Urkedal <urkedal at nbi.dk>:
> On 2011-08-10, Ivan Maidanski wrote:
> > Another Q: make distcheck is not working complaining that config.h is
> > not found. Could you advise me what's the problem?
> Do you have a libatomic_ops subdirectory from old times?  in my case it
> complains this directory is missing.  After removing
> "EXTRA_DIST += libatomic_ops", distcheck worked.

More information about the Gc mailing list