From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21219 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2013 14:43:43 -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 21200 invoked by uid 89); 25 Jun 2013 14:43:40 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 14:43:40 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r5PEhbUH020037 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:43:37 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r5PEhZfK006524; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:43:35 -0400 Message-ID: <51C9AC97.9000506@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 14:50:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130514 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: Hans-Peter Nilsson , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] don't keep a gdb-specific date References: <1371835865-15879-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> <871u7rwodv.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130624224138.GC5326@adacore.com> <87y59ythcd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87y59ythcd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00703.txt.bz2 On 06/25/2013 03:06 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > H-P> The "sim" CVS module explicitly mentions (includes) > H-P> gdb/version.in: that needs to be tweaked too, so "sim" can > H-P> (continue to) be checked out without gdb and then built on its own. > H-P> (Hopefully not a surprise?) Thanks. > > I think rather we have to back out the patch. > IIRC you can't really change the definition of modules like that. > sim using this file in gdb is an error, IMO, but not one I think is > worth a lot of effort to fix. > I'll prepare a reversion patch shortly. IMO, it'd make sense to push a very light/simple "VERSION" file that only has the date and nothing else, like $ cat src/VERSION 20130625 $ to the top level. Then any project in the tree could source that single file any way it saw fit. -- Pedro Alves