From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3284 invoked by alias); 1 Sep 2011 09:51:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 3276 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Sep 2011 09:51:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nogent.walsimou.com (HELO bekkor.walsimou.com) (82.67.240.252) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 09:51:38 +0000 Received: from [192.168.2.101] ([192.168.2.101]) (AUTH: PLAIN walsimou@walsimou.com, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,CAMELLIA256-SHA) by bekkor.walsimou.com with esmtp; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 11:51:37 +0200 id 0108DC19.4E5F55A9.00016950 Message-ID: <4E5F55A9.6080901@embtoolkit.org> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 09:51:00 -0000 From: Abdoulaye Walsimou GAYE User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110805 Thunderbird/3.1.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: was (Fwd: Re: binutils-2.20.1a replaced by 2.20.1 and so 2.21.1a?): symlink old tarball name to new one Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2011-09/txt/msg00002.txt.bz2 Dear all, How about to have the same simlinks to new gdb tarballs name? Thanks, AWG -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: binutils-2.20.1a replaced by 2.20.1 and so 2.21.1a? Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 10:43:20 +0200 From: Tristan Gingold To: Abdoulaye Walsimou GAYE CC: Steffen Dettmer , binutils@sourceware.org On Aug 31, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Abdoulaye Walsimou GAYE wrote: > On 08/30/2011 05:36 PM, Tristan Gingold wrote: >> On Aug 30, 2011, at 5:32 PM, Steffen Dettmer wrote: >> >>>> This was a license issue raised by the FSF: some files were >>>> derived from cgen files, but these cgen files weren't included >>>> in the tarballs. We were asked by the FSF to repackage all the >>>> incomplete tarballs. >>> Thank you for your quick reply. >>> >>> The issue itself is interesting. Sounds like much effort and may >>> even require undesired things like modifying release tags... >>> I though it would be sufficient to publish GPLed files, not that a >>> special form could be required (and I had assumed it had been >>> sufficient to put them on some public server or even just to some >>> CVS repository reabable by the public). >> Yes, the workload is not minimal, but this was the FSF decision. >> >> Tristan. > > This kind of URL change is a serial killer for automatic build system/script already shipped. > Is it possible to have simlinks like 'oldername'->'newname' > (as for example binutils-2.21.1a.tar.bz2 tarball will actually contain binutils-2.21.1)? Yes, good idea. Done for 2.16 to 2.21.1. Tristan.