This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [committed, gcc-5-branch] Set DEV-PHASE to prerelease
- From: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 11:31:11 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [committed, gcc-5-branch] Set DEV-PHASE to prerelease
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150423233152 dot GA9034 at intel dot com> <20150424060006 dot GI1751 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <yddbni0k8mo dot fsf at lokon dot CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE> <20150504092106 dot GB1751 at tucnak dot redhat dot com>
On Mon, 4 May 2015, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 11:13:51AM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:
> >
> > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 04:31:52PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I checked this patch into gcc-5-branch.
> > >
> > > That's wrong according to https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html#num_scheme
> >
> > HJ has a point, though: with DEV-PHASE remaining empty, all post-5.1.0
> > versions of gcc identify as 5.1.1, with no way of telling them apart,
> > like datestamp and revison.
>
> That suggests we should change
> DATESTAMP_s := "\"$(if $(DEVPHASE_c), $(DATESTAMP_c))\""
> so that it would expand to DATESTAMP_c also if DEVPHASE_c is empty,
> but BASEVER_c does not end with .0
Yes.
Richard.
--
Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild,
Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)