From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25834 invoked by alias); 25 May 2010 17:09:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 25804 invoked by uid 22791); 25 May 2010 17:09:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_FAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de (HELO merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de) (131.220.223.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 May 2010 17:09:21 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C42654000486E; Tue, 25 May 2010 19:09:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p2k4eVv2YeId; Tue, 25 May 2010 19:09:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ins.uni-bonn.de (gibraltar [192.168.193.254]) by merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5257940000E0E; Tue, 25 May 2010 19:09:15 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 17:09:00 -0000 From: Ralf Wildenhues To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: binutils@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org, gcc@gnu.org, DJ Delorie Subject: Re: toplevel out of sync Message-ID: <20100525170912.GA21863@ins.uni-bonn.de> References: <4BFBF578.40904@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BFBF578.40904@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-05/txt/msg00075.txt.bz2 * Paolo Bonzini wrote on Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:06:16PM CEST: > the toplevel configury of gcc/gdb/binutils is very much out of sync. > Unfortunately I don't have much time to devote to bringing the trees > back in shape, and not even to chase down committers of patches > placed only on one side. Can anybody help with this? I can take a look. > ... the last date when the tree was synchronized ... It looked fairly good 3 months ago[1]. Do you prefer tracking down committers and letting them finish their work, or should I just go ahead and sync sets of commits as I did last time? Thanks, Ralf [1] $ L="git log --until=3.months.ago --pretty=format:%H" $ diff <( cd gcc && git show $($L origin/trunk | head -n 1):configure.ac ) \ <( cd src && git show $($L origin/master | head -n 1):configure.ac )