[PATCH 1 of 1] config/libc/glibc.in: Fix for glibc 2.10.1 CVS branch

[PATCH 1 of 1] config/libc/glibc.in: Fix for glibc 2.10.1 CVS branch

[Frederic Roussel]

# HG changeset patch
# User "Frederic Roussel" <fr.frasc@gmail.com>
# Date 1259717263 28800
# Node ID 43ecf1db5f57abd68f0b28227d246f6bba44e05b
# Parent  5f26745a915c8bac992aee9e0453cef9c4e868e9
config/libc/glibc.in: Fix for glibc 2.10.1 CVS branch

the CVS tree doesn't have a glibc-2_10_1-branch branch. only a glibc-2_10_1 branch exists. moreovert there is no "ports" in CVS for 2.10.1. Better to disable CVS for now rather than break.

Signed-off-by: "Frederic Roussel" <fr.frasc@gmail.com>

diff -r 5f26745a915c -r 43ecf1db5f57 config/libc/glibc.in
--- a/config/libc/glibc.in	Thu Nov 26 00:22:17 2009 +0100
+++ b/config/libc/glibc.in	Tue Dec 01 17:27:43 2009 -0800
@@ -110,6 +110,7 @@
 config LIBC_GLIBC_CVS
     bool
     prompt "CVS checkout"
+    depends on ! LIBC_V_2_10_1
     help
       See the help for the entry "Released tarball", above.
       

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq

[PATCH 0 of 1] CVS retrieval of GLIBC cannot work for 2.10.1

[Frederic Roussel]

Hi All,

I've noticed that CVS retrieval for glibc cannot work, so I made a patch to disable it in glibc.in.

There are several reasons for the CVS retrieval to fail:
- glibc-2_10_1-branch doesn't exist in the CVS tree. only glibc-2_10_1 is there. but the CT_GetCVS assumes that -branch will always be the suffix to use.
- there is no ports module for 2.10.1 yet

I probably don't understand all the subtelty of glibc CVS tree tags naming, but I have noticed that some trees are clearly identical acrtoss versions. For instance "glibc-2_10-branch" and "glibc-2_10_1" are identical. glibc-2_10-branch/version.h carries the version 2.10.1

That being said, the upstream project advertizes the use of "git" rather than "cvs".

Is there any work going on to have "git" trees retrieved ?

Oh, before I forget, the recurring build failure for glibc (2.10.1) that I was seeing before Thanksgiving went totally away for some mysterious reasons. That had been discussed in this list around July 23. As suggested I tried 'ct-ng distclean' but no matter of cleanup solved my problem as it did for the original reporter.
The Cross-Linux From Scratch foks were seeing the same problem. Based on their findings I introduced:
CT_LIBC_GLIBC_EXTRA_CFLAGS="-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE
Yeah, I don't like it either. But that made the problm go away.

After Thanksgiving, I tried again without the flag. Lo and behold it worked. I don't know if any the checkins from Yann might have fixed that.

I just wanted to document it in the list, in case it happens again.

Thanks

--Frederic


--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq

Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] CVS retrieval of GLIBC cannot work for 2.10.1

[Yann E. MORIN]

Hello Frederic!
Hello All!

On Wednesday 02 December 2009 02:28:16 Frederic Roussel wrote:
> I've noticed that CVS retrieval for glibc cannot work, so I made a patch
> to disable it in glibc.in.

Don't bother hacking CVS in glibc, it's going away now that there are git
trees available. CVS is already gone in my local copy, but as git is not
yet ready, I haven't pushed the changes yet. Should be done by the end of
the week...

> That being said, the upstream project advertizes the use of "git" rather
> than "cvs".
> Is there any work going on to have "git" trees retrieved ?

Yes, it's almost ready.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
`------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'



--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq

Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] CVS retrieval of GLIBC cannot work for 2.10.1

[ng]

Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> Hello Frederic!
> Hello All!
> 
> On Wednesday 02 December 2009 02:28:16 Frederic Roussel wrote:
>> I've noticed that CVS retrieval for glibc cannot work, so I made a patch
>> to disable it in glibc.in.
> 
> Don't bother hacking CVS in glibc, it's going away now that there are git
> trees available. CVS is already gone in my local copy, but as git is not
> yet ready, I haven't pushed the changes yet. Should be done by the end of
> the week...
> 
>> That being said, the upstream project advertizes the use of "git" rather
>> than "cvs".
>> Is there any work going on to have "git" trees retrieved ?
> 
> Yes, it's almost ready.
> 
> Regards,
> Yann E. MORIN.
> 

Hi Yann,

could you confirm that previous installations fo ct-ng will still function?

I installed ct-ng just before you started moving to git and after a fair 
bit of work getting to know it I built a toolchain matched to my 
requirements.

Unless there are very important underlying reasons I do not intent to 
disrupt a working tested development system , however I do need to 
retain the possibility to recreate exactly the same thing should the 
need arise (fs corruption, whatever ).

I have enough work on my plate using ct-ng, I really do not have the 
time to learn git as well and start more learning curves and reinventing 
the wheel in order to remain where I am now with a working system.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what this is about but it would be good if you 
could clarify.

Many thanks, Peter.

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq

Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] CVS retrieval of GLIBC cannot work for 2.10.1

[Yann E. MORIN]

Hello!

ng@piments.com wrote:
> could you confirm that previous installations fo ct-ng will still function?

If you based tour work on a release tarball, then this release tarball
will still be available, and will not be impacted. So you'll be able to
reproduce your toolchains.

If you based your work on a clone of the repository, and you did note
the 'revision' of the repository you used, then you'll be able to
reproduce your toolchains.

> Maybe I'm misinterpreting what this is about but it would be good if you 
> could clarify.

I am not migrating crosstool-NG to git. I am adding support in crosstool-NG
to use GIT repositories, so it can use the glibc GIT tree instead of the
CVS repository.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |   ^                |
| --==< O_o >==-- '------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  /e\  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | (*_*) | / \ HTML MAIL    |  """  conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------'-------'------------------'--------------------'

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq