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: PR 9479 (was Re: GCC-3.2.2 pre-release (third iteration))


On Friday 07 February 2003 14:36, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 11:15:52AM +0100, Franz Sirl wrote:
> > That's exactly the reason why I regularly request the binutils mainline
> > version to be bumped automatically when a release out of the branch is
> > done. Then it's much easier to correlate the binutils versions. Strangely
> > enough nobody else seems to feel the need...
>
> Because:
>  - I keep suggesting you ask on the binutils list, rather than nagging
> people in private.

Uhm, I asked on the list without much response, so I kept quiet since then. I 
picked up the ball again only because this situation fits :-).

>  - In coordination with releases isn't the right time to do it.
> Whenever there's a relevant feature, that's the right time to do it.
> The releases come from a different branch, and what works in one may
> not in the other.

The point I'm trying to make is about "has at least these features working", I 
don't care if the current binutils mainline has more working features or 
fixed bugs.

So for example to check for 2.13.1 or better features with the mainline bumped 
to 2.13.91 the check would look like:

  (relver >= 2.13.1 || mainlinever >= 2.13.91 || hjlver >= 2.13.91.0.0)

Now this translates into quite simpler pattern matching (mainlinever and 
hjlver can easily be combined into one match) compared to now. And every time 
when a feature/bug fix requiring a date match is backported to the branch and 
subsequently released, the date checks can be replaced with simple version 
checks.

So, why not bump the mainline version on every feature addition/bug fix? 
Simply practical reasoning, as with most things that everybody is responsible 
for, in the end nobody will actually do it. So this would require some kind 
of "version bump manager", which sounds like overkill to me. Also this will 
actually give us more granularity than we usually need, As long as binutils 
releases happen in regular intervals (Thanks Daniel!), bumping mainline 
version on every release sounds like a simple and realizable plan to me.

As for the feature checks that Joe suggested, history shows that a lot of 
binutils feature checks are next to impossible to implement in a 
cross-platform way, that's the reason why the version and date checks are 
there after all.

Franz.


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