This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PATCH: Bump version on mainline
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> > There are problems with that: we want a cvs checkout at the release
> > tag to duplicate what's in the tarball (except for generated files
> > that are never kept in CVS)
> I had anticipated this objection, and should have mentioned it. I don't
> really see this as a very big deal, since, as you say, you can't really get
> exactly the same bits with "cvs export" as it is. And, why would you want to?
> Just grab the release tarball.
> The key invariant to me is that the release tarball can be regenerated easily,
> and that's still true: running the release script using the tag created when
> it was previously run should produce an equivalent tarball.
There are the web page dumps included in the distribution, which are taken
from the website to get the preprocessing. However, this is a limitation
of the script it would be desirable to fix: in principle it should tag
wwwdocs, check out the relevant pages and do the preprocessing itself.
The files which get changed for a release could, within the script itself,
be automatically changed, checked in, the release tagged and made and then
the files changed back by the script. The only bit it doesn't do of that
14. Increment the version number in gcc/version.c, and put back the
date stamp and (prerelease) annotation. Increment the version
number in doc/include/gcc-common.texi.
but the script could clearly be made to do so, and so to keep the files
tagged in CVS corresponding to those in the release. The script already
updates and checks in version.c to remove the date and (prerelease tag),
it just doesn't put them back (with increased version number) afterwards.
Joseph S. Myers http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
email@example.com (personal mail)
firstname.lastname@example.org (CodeSourcery mail)
email@example.com (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)