Mirror of the gdb mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: gdb@sourceware.org
Cc: Samuel Bronson <naesten@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What is keeping GDB in CVS ?
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 17:30:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3ljnorv0p.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090619164943.GA16137@caradoc.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Fri\, 19 Jun 2009 12\:49\:43 -0400")

>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:

Daniel> The solution I'd like best, I think, is one with separate projects
Daniel> that makes it easy to manually or automatically sync revisions from
Daniel> the shared directories.  This may be nothing more than some clever
Daniel> push hooks, for instance to reject manual changes to bfd/ being pushed
Daniel> to the central gdb repository and to automatically propogate changes
Daniel> to bfd/ from binutils.  Anyone feeling inspired enough to build a
Daniel> proof-of-concept?

I meant to reply again on the binutils thread, but I'm super
distracted these days.

I researched it a bit and I believe that git doesn't provide a nice
way to solve the modules problem.  There are a couple promising
approaches but I think if you look closely they don't really work (in
one case the exact feature we need was never merged into git).

One idea I had is to have an "infrastructure" repository holding
top-level configure, plus libiberty and include.  Then, gcc, src,
cgen, cygwin, etc would simply merge from this repository.  And, we'd
have a rule: no local changes.

These kinds of merges are trivial, we do them all the time in archer
(archer's master branch tracks gdb's master branch this way).  You
could even automate them, if the no local change rule was enforced.

Finally, I think binutils+gdb should probably just be a single source
repository.  They share enough to warrant that, IMO.  I suspect the
disk space overhead is not large.

I have no idea what to do about insight.

The problem with this approach is that it is less convenient than what
we have now.  If you have a change that touches libiberty then you
need two separate commits.

I suppose this is basically what you're saying :-)

I guess some new version of svn solves the module problem.
But... after working with git for the last year, I used svn for a gcc
patch this week and I was surprised by how amazingly slow it now
feels.  I'd really prefer git by a large margin.

Tom


  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-06-19 17:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-19 16:13 Samuel Bronson
2009-06-19 16:23 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-06-19 16:28   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-06-19 16:38     ` Christopher Faylor
2009-06-19 16:49       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-06-19 16:56         ` Richard Earnshaw
2009-06-19 17:28           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-06-19 17:30         ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2009-06-19 19:18           ` Joseph S. Myers
2009-06-19 17:18       ` Joseph S. Myers
2009-06-19 19:22         ` Christopher Faylor
2009-06-19 19:29           ` Joseph S. Myers
2009-06-20 18:48             ` Christopher Faylor
2009-06-20 19:19               ` Joseph S. Myers
2009-06-20 20:36                 ` Christopher Faylor
2009-06-20 20:53                 ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-06-25 21:45                 ` Tom Tromey
2009-06-26 12:28                   ` Daniel Jacobowitz

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=m3ljnorv0p.fsf@fleche.redhat.com \
    --to=tromey@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
    --cc=naesten@gmail.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