Re: Patches submission policy change

Jakub Jelinek via Gdb
2024-04-03T08:46:18Z

On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 10:22:24AM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Any concerns/objections?

I'm all for it, in fact I've been sending it like that myself for years
even when the policy said not to. In most cases, the diff for the
regenerated files is very small and it helps even in patch review to
actually check if the configure.ac/m4 etc. changes result just in the
expected changes and not some unrelated ones (e.g. caused by user using
wrong version of autoconf/automake etc.).
There can be exceptions, e.g. when in GCC we update from a new version
of Unicode, the regenerated ucnid.h diff can be large and
uname2c.h can be huge, such that it can trigger the mailing list size
limits even when the patch is compressed, see e.g.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/636427.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/636426.html
But I think most configure or Makefile changes should be pretty small,
usual changes shouldn't rewrite everything in those files.

Jakub