From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, roland@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch] build-id .debug files load (like .gnu_debuglink)
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 14:22:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ufy1yv52d.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200709011325.l81DPEHK015069@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (message from Mark Kettenis on Sat, 1 Sep 2007 15:25:14 +0200 (CEST))
> Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 15:25:14 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> CC: eliz@gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, roland@redhat.com
>
> I think we should stick with references to official GNU releases in
> our documentation.
I'd support that if most installations had official versions. But
that doesn't seem to be the case in the recent years: almost every
GNU/Linux box I get my hands on have "2.aa.bb YYYYMMDD" version on it.
Here's a typical example (from none other than a gnu.org machine,
btw):
eliz@fencepost:~$ ld --version
GNU ld version 2.16.91 20060118 Debian GNU/Linux
Given that this seems to be the rule rather than exception, I see no
sense in insisting that unofficial versions do not exist, or aren't
used widely enough to be mentioned in the docs.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-01 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-24 18:05 Jan Kratochvil
2007-08-24 18:20 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-08-25 22:49 ` Jan Kratochvil
2007-08-25 23:58 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-08-26 9:41 ` Jan Kratochvil
2007-08-31 9:38 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-08-31 20:51 ` [patch approval?] " Jan Kratochvil
2007-08-31 21:12 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-09-01 8:01 ` Eli Zaretskii
[not found] ` <20070901081934.GA31205@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
2007-09-01 10:31 ` [patch] " Eli Zaretskii
2007-09-01 11:35 ` Jan Kratochvil
2007-09-01 12:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-09-01 13:12 ` Jan Kratochvil
2007-09-01 13:25 ` Mark Kettenis
2007-09-01 14:22 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2007-09-02 13:57 ` [patch approved?] [doc] " Jan Kratochvil
2007-09-02 17:49 ` Mark Kettenis
2007-09-02 19:38 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-09-01 14:16 ` [patch] " Eli Zaretskii
2007-09-04 2:21 ` Roland McGrath
2007-09-04 3:23 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-09-04 7:21 ` Roland McGrath
2007-09-15 9:52 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-09-16 17:19 ` Roland McGrath
2007-08-25 22:48 ` Roland McGrath
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ufy1yv52d.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox