From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28700 invoked by alias); 18 Apr 2012 14:45:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 28542 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Apr 2012 14:45:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:45:02 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q3IEimbg016736 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:44:48 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q3IEikYa023080; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:44:47 -0400 Message-ID: <4F8ED35E.1040208@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:52:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [commit 1/3] Import gnulib's update-copyright script References: <1325665146-31682-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <1325665146-31682-2-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <4F8EB486.5020308@redhat.com> <20120418143606.GA2852@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20120418143606.GA2852@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00579.txt.bz2 On 04/18/2012 03:36 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >>> gdb/ChangeLog: >>> >>> * gnulib/extra/update-copyright: New file, imported from gnulib. >> >> >> It looks like this file was simply copied over instead of imported with >> gnulib-tool? If I reimport the gnulib/ directory from scratch, we lose it: > > I am pretty sure I pulled it using gnulib tool... But I think > I then just selectively checked the script in only, to avoid > bringing in more changes than necessary. > > This business of maintaining our gnulib import is getting a little > silly, because we cannot determine for sure how people might have > imported stuff. Perhaps we should just go ahead with the script > I wrote to import/update our gnulib import, and make sure people > use that? It might not be the perfect way of doing it, but at least > it would be consistent. I don't see how that scripts would have prevented the selective check-in. :-) It may help by keeping the git version in some script variable, that the script checks, instead of having to fetch the version from the ChangeLog? The new gnulib/ parent directory seems like a good place for this stuff. > >> If I pull the "update-copyright" gnulib module in addition, with: > [...] >> then we get it back, but, we get an older 2010 version, thus we end up >> with a non-empty diff, see below. > > Do you know why? I thought that it would just import whatever version > you have checked out. Did you do the import using the exact same > version that you used during the last import? Yes, exactly. The last import was: 2010-05-23 Pedro Alves Update gnulib from latest git. (250b80067c1e1d8faa0c42fb572f721975b929c5) That's the git hash. So I'm picking up that date's version. > > When I did this, I just pulled the latest gnulib from git, and then > called gnulib tool. That's why I am a little confused by you saying > that you'll update gnulib using gnulib-tool. > >> It doesn't look like we miss anything important for us. I think I'll >> apply this, > > We'll need the latest version by the end of the year. There are two > things that it brings which we use: warnings when an FSF copyright > isn't found, and also merging all copyright years together into > one single range. > >> Okay in principle? > > Sure! I think you know how to use gnulib way better than I do. Okay. :-) -- Pedro Alves