From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.160.47]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QWfyk-000224-Al for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 04:37:14 +0200 Received: by pwj9 with SMTP id 9so111542pwj.6 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:33:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4TN1cN4nub4ZhthFI8WKR48sX7VRTvNeVWjG5EatFec=; b=tlcXhK8CJ4zUR48nnO4W7RtrHsvVyC+7IQj/J+lKZH72cbM6fwwaBzkp2a0DqQRiX1 E8o3slKHkv5hoMbZNxQ3m0d9vRJr4uN0yYAntSRzyuiFmIAhc9FzLn0VieFmxAO7H4UX 3oWfu0aB8hsPOsZNnxEKF/PRg2t++VPpjjDpE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=UeWHnQ0P93cZetYgLhra7Yz0qyO93q+bEw7qDjaFR+cNJ0WpbRM5l355TDG3UYW/PK iJx59mxOKtp+B5Sk6VaVpzIgCNW9sdeTKHej9h371r3+e+zlOGmaf9KRfFgwalepKPHm u1iW47U2JIenvNRaNP8PeybYOJmQXNLTWUrYs= Received: by 10.142.222.9 with SMTP id u9mr1380375wfg.242.1308105227230; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.70] (99-57-141-118.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [99.57.141.118]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o16sm7721875wff.13.2011.06.14.19.33.44 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:33:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4DF81A07.3090502@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:33:43 -0700 From: Khem Raj User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110516 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org References: <1307955075.6879.11.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> <1308043725.25285.232.camel@phil-desktop> <1308055023.15712.333.camel@rex> In-Reply-To: <1308055023.15712.333.camel@rex> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Upgrade gcc 4.6.0 to latest on FSF 4.6 branch X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:37:14 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 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