Re: [PATCH 0/1] Upgrade gcc 4.6.0 to latest on FSF 4.6 branch

[Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>]

On 06/14/2011 05:37 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 10:28 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 10:12 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Phil Blundell<pb@pbcl.net>  wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 21:03 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>> This patch brings in new patches from gcc 4.6 FSF branch
>>>>> And refreshes the headers of existing backported patches
>>>>> to not have git patch numbers in comments
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sending the patch itself to mailing list due to its
>>>>> large size so please review it on the contrib tree itself
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Would we not be better off just pulling the tip of the 4.6 branch from
>>>> FSF SVN, rather than having to keep all these patches in git?
>>>>
>>>
>>> there is dislike for this approach in oe-core. As the release point is preferred
>>> I suggested to drop the minor release number and call the recipes 4.6
>>> and use SVN
>>> REVs to track the recipe updates but it did not fly :)
>>
>> Where does that dislike come from?  Koen did make a comment about having
>> liked svn checkouts for 4.5 "very, very much" but I couldn't quite
>> figure out whether he was being sarcastic or not and, if so, what
>> exactly his objection was.
>>
>> I could understand there being a preference for individual patchsets if
>> we were just going to cherry-pick carefully selected bugfixes from the
>> branch and patch them in.  But, if we're going to take the approach of
>> just importing everything from the branch en masse, it seems like
>> keeping them as patches is just making more work for ourselves.
>>
>> We're using svn checkouts for eglibc, which seems to be working well
>> enough and hasn't provoked any particular outrage that I noticed.
>
> I think it was my dislike that Khem is referring to. I was under the
> impression that we were going to be more selective that just taking
> everything (e.g. the translation updates probably aren't essential to
> us).
>
> I realise its easier to just take everything though and if we are going
> to do that it probably does make sense to use svn directly. I'll take a
> patch to do that.

What goes into release branches of gcc are strictly bug fixes only. So 
its safe to get them all

I will prepare a patch for it.

>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core