Stopping daily bump of version.c on old/closed branches
Daniel Berlin
dberlin@dberlin.org
Wed Apr 23 11:39:00 GMT 2003
On Wednesday, April 23, 2003, at 03:26 AM, Phil Edwards wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 03:21:39AM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday, April 23, 2003, at 02:41 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As I announced earlier, the branch gcc-3_2-branch will be closed
>>> after GCC-3.2.3 is realesed. By that I really mean that we don't
>>> have
>>> anything like GCC-3.2.4 floating around. My inclination is to have
>>> the conjob that currently bumps gcc/version.c not touch
>>> gcc-3_2-branch.
>>>
>> What is this script written in?
>
> top level, maintainer-scripts/update_version
>
> It's just sh, most of them are. I wouldn't want to see them rewritten
> in perl, to be honest. And most of them that do use sh are pretty
> straightforward.
I wasn't proposing rewriting, it's just i didn't want to tamper with
scripts written in a language
i'm not familiar with the nuances of.
So I asked what they were written in, since I didn't want to make a
suggestion
without being able to at least conditionally volunteer to implement it.
:)
In this case, it looks like we would be changing
BRANCHES=`$CVS status -v gcc/ChangeLog \
| awk '{print $1;}' \
| egrep 'gcc-[0-9]+_[0-9]+-branch$'`
to something like
BRANCHES=`cat gcc/active-branches` \
| awk '{print $1;}'
(or whatever)
if we were to use a list of active branches.
--Dan
More information about the Gcc
mailing list