From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24049 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2011 05:10:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 24037 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Mar 2011 05:10:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.synsport.com (HELO shepard.synsport.net) (208.69.230.148) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 05:10:31 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.11] (atoulouse-256-1-103-201.w86-210.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.210.190.201]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0254E435D7 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 23:10:28 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <4D770BCC.7030904@marino.st> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 05:10:00 -0000 From: MFL Commissioner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: PATCH SET: DragonFly BSD, config.guess, and config.rpath References: <4D76A419.8090905@marino.st> <201103082218.44673.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <201103082218.44673.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg00172.txt.bz2 On 3/9/2011 4:18 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 16:48:09 John Marino wrote: >> 2011-03-08 John Marino >> >> * bfd/config.bfd: Add x86_64-*-dragonfly*, fix i386-*-dragonfly* >> * bfd/configure.in: Delete unused bfd_elf32_i386_dragonfly_vec >> * bfd/configure: Regenerate. > changelog paths are relative to the file they go into. since these entries go > into bfd/ChangeLog, the paths should be relative to that. so drop "bfd/" from > all of these. > Okay, that was a mistake on my part. But can whoever commits this just fix it on the fly? Is another set of file submissions really necessary? (aimed at somebody that can commit these, not you Mike) >> 3) config.guess.current.patch >> 4) config.guess.221.patch >> Pending GCC requirements, the preceding patches will update config.guess >> to the last version defined by project/config. Use the following commit >> message: 2011_MM_DD_changelog.guess.txt >> >> >> 5) config.rpath.current.patch >> 6) config.rpath.221.patch >> Pending GCC requirements, the preceding patches will update config.guess >> to the last version defined by project/gnulib. Use the following commit >> message: 2011_MM_DD_changelog.repath.txt > btw, when Ralf talked about gcc, he meant they should be submitted to gcc- > patches@gcc.gnu.org first. > -mike Ok. That wasn't clear what he meant. Regards, John