This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: Making your branches smaller for easier merges


On 28/09/06, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Sorry, I still don't see where is the problem. You either want the
> extension in your branch, so you merge it and simply update libstdc++,
> or you don't want the extension just yet, so you just don't update
> libstdc++ (or update back to your previous revision).
That means you have to follow what is going on the mainline closer than
you would if you just branched the whole sources.  Yes changes like this
has happened for 4.2.0 even.  Since you branched the GCC directory for
non front-end changes like say a new opimization, you don't want to follow
what is happening on the C++ front-end side that closely .Also you don't know
if it was too late to update until you actually did it.


I don't see what is the difference between "merging your branched dir and updating everything else" and "branch and merge everything". In both cases you may need to review the changes and in both cases you can go back to before the merge. The only difference is that in the first case you don't merge changes for the directories that are not branched, just update (or not).

Anyway, I may be misunderstanding the whole issue, so I drop the ball
here. I have the awful feeling that I have hichjacked Daniel's thread.

Manuel.


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