From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9393 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2015 19:08:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 9378 invoked by uid 89); 20 Jan 2015 19:08:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 19:08:11 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B40116448; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 14:08:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id JEtkDt3+lsWg; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 14:08:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD52111643B; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 14:08:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3A7BC48E89; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 20:08:09 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 19:08:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Building the 7.8.90 pretest on MinGW Message-ID: <20150120190809.GL4041@adacore.com> References: <83vbk82fkg.fsf@gnu.org> <83egqv2jq7.fsf@gnu.org> <20150120182741.GK4041@adacore.com> <83lhkxwb7r.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83lhkxwb7r.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2015-01/txt/msg00551.txt.bz2 > > No one's really answered, so I'll provide some feedback: We can add > > one or more modules, but I'm pretty sure the code for all modules need > > to be from the same version of gnulib. > > What about just "cherry-picking" that single change? Or would that > cause trouble further down the line, when we do update gnulib? It doesn't work with the way we import gnulib - we import using a SHA1 as a reference so that others can repeat the exact same import when adding new modules. If you are curious, the script we use is at gdb/gnulib/update-gnulib.sh (see GNULIB_COMMIT_SHA1). -- Joel