* The old libiberty/cplus-dem.c? @ 1999-08-22 11:14 H.J. Lu 1999-08-29 12:48 ` Ian Lance Taylor 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: H.J. Lu @ 1999-08-22 11:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: binutils libiberty/cplus-dem.c in binutils seems older than the one in gcc 2.95.1. Are them from thes same source? -- H.J. Lu (hjl@gnu.org) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: The old libiberty/cplus-dem.c? 1999-08-22 11:14 The old libiberty/cplus-dem.c? H.J. Lu @ 1999-08-29 12:48 ` Ian Lance Taylor 1999-08-29 13:19 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Ian Lance Taylor @ 1999-08-29 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: hjl; +Cc: binutils Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 11:13:46 -0700 (PDT) From: hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu) libiberty/cplus-dem.c in binutils seems older than the one in gcc 2.95.1. Are them from thes same source? They are conceptually the same, but as a matter of practice the binutils CVS repository is completely distinct from the gcc CVS repository. Perhaps we should make a practice of importing the binutils libiberty directory from the gcc one. Ian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: The old libiberty/cplus-dem.c? 1999-08-29 12:48 ` Ian Lance Taylor @ 1999-08-29 13:19 ` Jeffrey A Law 1999-08-29 13:32 ` Ian Lance Taylor 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1999-08-29 13:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ian Lance Taylor; +Cc: hjl, binutils In message < 19990829194121.3918.qmail@daffy.airs.com >you write: > Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 11:13:46 -0700 (PDT) > From: hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu) > > libiberty/cplus-dem.c in binutils seems older than the one in gcc > 2.95.1. Are them from thes same source? > > They are conceptually the same, but as a matter of practice the > binutils CVS repository is completely distinct from the gcc CVS > repository. > > Perhaps we should make a practice of importing the binutils libiberty > directory from the gcc one. One of the other approaches would be to have a unified CVS repository across the projects -- I've been kicking the idea around with the gdb folks recently to get their initial impressions of the idea. Any thoughts Ian? jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: The old libiberty/cplus-dem.c? 1999-08-29 13:19 ` Jeffrey A Law @ 1999-08-29 13:32 ` Ian Lance Taylor 1999-08-30 0:07 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Ian Lance Taylor @ 1999-08-29 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: law; +Cc: binutils Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 13:57:47 -0600 From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com> > Perhaps we should make a practice of importing the binutils libiberty > directory from the gcc one. One of the other approaches would be to have a unified CVS repository across the projects -- I've been kicking the idea around with the gdb folks recently to get their initial impressions of the idea. Any thoughts Ian? I have no problem with that. It works at Cygnus, and it ought to work on sourceware. I think we should talk about who has control over the shared parts of the tree. For gcc and binutils, or gcc and gdb, I think that is just the top level configury stuff and libiberty. For binutils and gdb, it is also the bfd, opcodes, and include directories. I suppose we'd have to be that much more careful about who got write access, since anybody with write access to any part of the tree would be able to get write access to the whole tree. However, this is probably not a major concern. Ian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: The old libiberty/cplus-dem.c? 1999-08-29 13:32 ` Ian Lance Taylor @ 1999-08-30 0:07 ` Jeffrey A Law 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1999-08-30 0:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ian Lance Taylor; +Cc: binutils In message < 19990829203216.4101.qmail@daffy.airs.com >you write: > I think we should talk about who has control over the shared parts of > the tree. For gcc and binutils, or gcc and gdb, I think that is just > the top level configury stuff and libiberty. For binutils and gdb, it > is also the bfd, opcodes, and include directories. This is the general concern everyone I've talked to has had. I'd tend to want to put the binutils folks in charge of bfd, opcodes and include since they're the ones that usually end up working on that stuff. The gdb folks tend to do most of their work in gdb itself, gdb should also have readline, mmalloc, tui and the other things where they are the exclusive owner/user. The toplevel configury & libiberty are the most problematical based on my experiences since they're shared by every project. Thus my desire to at least cut down on the number of diverging copies. > I suppose we'd have to be that much more careful about who got write > access, since anybody with write access to any part of the tree would > be able to get write access to the whole tree. However, this is > probably not a major concern. Actually, I think we can make this work reasonably well. I've been told there is a version of the CVS server which puts the lockfiles into a separate dir than the CVS files themselves. Assuming that is true, we could make the entire repository world readable, but each subdir would be "owned" by a project and would be group writable. The toplevel configury and such would have its own group. It's a fairly minor extension of what we're doing right now. I don't know all the details of how the web CVS trees work, but we might want to have wwwdocs/{binutils,gdb,gcc,...} so that we don't need a separate CVS repo for just the web sites. I haven't worked through any more of the details since I just floated the idea a week or two ago when I was in Sunnyvale. The gdb folks showed an interest (with similar concerns), and I'd like to bring gcc into the fold (which will require busting through some major political roadblocks). jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1999-08-30 0:07 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 1999-08-22 11:14 The old libiberty/cplus-dem.c? H.J. Lu 1999-08-29 12:48 ` Ian Lance Taylor 1999-08-29 13:19 ` Jeffrey A Law 1999-08-29 13:32 ` Ian Lance Taylor 1999-08-30 0:07 ` Jeffrey A Law
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).