This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Version numbers
- To: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- Subject: Re: Version numbers
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 23:12:29 +0000 (GMT)
- cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Jeff Law <law at cygnus dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>
On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> > 2001-02-15 Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
> >
> > * version.c: Bump to "3.0 20010215 (prerelease)".
>
> I realize that also
> gcc/f/version.c
> libf2c/libF77/Version.c
> libf2c/libI77/Version.c
> libf2c/libU77/Version.c
> need to updated similarily.
As well as the mainline updates to 3.1, of course.
> Toon, how about simplifying that? At least gcc/f/version.c could reuse
> the string from gcc/version.c, and the three Version.c's in libf2c could
> share another one?
Perhaps we should have a *single* file in CVS containing all the version
numbers, and create all other files needed at build / configure time?
That is,
* CVS date.
* GCC version (3.0, etc.).
* g77 version (0.5.26, etc.).
* CHILL version (1.5.2, etc.).
* gcov version (1.5, etc.).
and any others. (Note what the GNU coding standards say about --version
output for programs with their own version numbers that are also part of a
larger distribution with its own version number.) Though, do we really
need separate version numbers for gcov or CHILL (which AFAIK never had
widespread distribution outside of GCC)?
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk