This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

From: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
To: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>, Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 07:23:26 -0800
Subject: Re: Add revision number to gcc version?
References: <20051114171441.GA12412@lucon.org> <787EE306-43A7-4D88-B458-E39420CED0D7@apple.com> <20051114220547.GA16652@lucon.org> <20051215221609.GA25537@lucon.org> <43A1F57A.50903@avtrex.com> <20051215233529.GA16869@nevyn.them.org>

On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 06:35:29PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:00:10PM -0800, David Daney wrote:
> > I like this, but what if you also did an svn status to see if there were 
> > any modifications WRT the branch/revision and then add either 'clean' or 
> > 'modified' to the information.
> > 
> > So you would get (gcc-4_1-branch revision 108596 modified) or 
> > (gcc-4_1-branch revision 108596 clean)
> 
> I think we already had this discussion and decided that svn status took
> too long in many cases.

I think running "svn status" in ./configure may slow down configure
a lot. Also, you may not always be able to run  "svn status" in
./configure since a gcc tree may not be checked out with svn. However,
running "svn status" in ./contrib/gcc_update may not be that
noticeable.

H.J.

References:
- Re: Add revision number to gcc version?
  - From: H. J. Lu
- Re: Add revision number to gcc version?
  - From: David Daney
- Re: Add revision number to gcc version?
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]