This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: More cpp.texi updates
- To: Zack Weinberg <zackw at Stanford dot EDU>, DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: More cpp.texi updates
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 15:19:55 -0700
- cc: "pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at" <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>, "neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk" <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
--On Monday, July 02, 2001 03:04:58 PM -0700 Zack Weinberg
<zackw@Stanford.EDU> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 05:17:30PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
>>
>> It means you cannot build a binary release on a system that doesn't
>> support building the man pages.
>
> Only if you build the binary release from CVS, not an official source
> release. It seems to me that building binary releases straight from
> CVS is a bad idea for other reasons, such as the possibility that you
> got something other than the official release.
Exactly.
It is much better that we cause this minor inconvenience than that
we risk shipping a release whose manual pages are not up to date,
which is what could happen if we try to keep them in synch in CVS.
However, the issue that DJ raises is exactly why I think snapshots
should be as release-like as possible; then you could build from
a snapshot and simulate building the next release.
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com