* RFC: Any objections to rebasing the zlib sources to 1.3.1 ?
@ 2025-07-31 12:17 Nick Clifton
2025-07-31 12:31 ` Sam James
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Nick Clifton @ 2025-07-31 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches, binutils
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 362 bytes --]
Hi Guys,
Are there any objections to rebasing the zlib sources in the
gdb-binutils repository to version 1.3.1 ? (Patch attached).
Apart from just the general good practice of using the latest released
version of the sources, this is also in response to PR 33097 which
reports that the current zlib sources do not build under MacOS.
Cheers
Nick
[-- Attachment #2: zlib.rebase.patch.xz --]
[-- Type: application/x-xz, Size: 93220 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Any objections to rebasing the zlib sources to 1.3.1 ?
2025-07-31 12:17 RFC: Any objections to rebasing the zlib sources to 1.3.1 ? Nick Clifton
@ 2025-07-31 12:31 ` Sam James
2025-07-31 13:00 ` Nick Clifton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Sam James @ 2025-07-31 12:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nick Clifton; +Cc: gdb-patches, binutils
Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> writes:
> Hi Guys,
Hi Nick,
>
> Are there any objections to rebasing the zlib sources in the
> gdb-binutils repository to version 1.3.1 ? (Patch attached).
>
> Apart from just the general good practice of using the latest released
> version of the sources, this is also in response to PR 33097 which
> reports that the current zlib sources do not build under MacOS.
I have it ready to go already. It's been approved on the GCC side, I
just can't push it yet because of a hook issue. My plan is once it's
pushed there to sync it in the binutils-gdb tree.
>
> Cheers
> Nick
>
> [2. application/x-xz; zlib.rebase.patch.xz]...
sam
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Any objections to rebasing the zlib sources to 1.3.1 ?
2025-07-31 12:31 ` Sam James
@ 2025-07-31 13:00 ` Nick Clifton
2025-07-31 13:36 ` Sam James
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Nick Clifton @ 2025-07-31 13:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sam James; +Cc: gdb-patches, binutils
Hi Sam,
> I have it ready to go already. It's been approved on the GCC side, I
> just can't push it yet because of a hook issue. My plan is once it's
> pushed there to sync it in the binutils-gdb tree.
Perfect - thanks very much.
Cheers
Nick
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: RFC: Any objections to rebasing the zlib sources to 1.3.1 ?
2025-07-31 13:00 ` Nick Clifton
@ 2025-07-31 13:36 ` Sam James
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Sam James @ 2025-07-31 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nick Clifton; +Cc: gdb-patches, binutils
Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> writes:
> Hi Sam,
Hi Nick,
>
>> I have it ready to go already. It's been approved on the GCC side, I
>> just can't push it yet because of a hook issue. My plan is once it's
>> pushed there to sync it in the binutils-gdb tree.
>
> Perfect - thanks very much.
No problem. I've just landed the gcc side, so I'll commit this side
shortly.
>
> Cheers
> Nick
thanks,
sam
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-07-31 13:37 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-07-31 12:17 RFC: Any objections to rebasing the zlib sources to 1.3.1 ? Nick Clifton
2025-07-31 12:31 ` Sam James
2025-07-31 13:00 ` Nick Clifton
2025-07-31 13:36 ` Sam James
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox