About 31109 - gprofng not built and installed in a combined binutils+gcc build

About 31109 - gprofng not built and installed in a combined binutils+gcc build

[Vladimir Mezentsev]

Hi,

I asked in https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31109
 > I prepared a patch for the releases/gcc-13 branch.
 > Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> rejected my patch for 
this branch.
 > Which branch should I use? master, trunk or something else?

Do you really need gprofng in the gcc repo ?
if yes:
   the fix is trivial.
   I did for the releases/gcc-13 branch:
      git cherry-pick 24552056fd5fc677c0d032f54a5cad1c4303d312
   Can anyone do the same for the correct branch.
   I have no write permissions for gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git

   I maintain binutils-gdb/gprofng. Who will maintain gcc/gprofng ?

If no:
  may I close 31109 ?

Thank you,
-Vladimir

.

Re: About 31109 - gprofng not built and installed in a combined binutils+gcc build

[Richard Biener]

On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 4:46 AM Vladimir Mezentsev
<vladimir.mezentsev@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I asked in https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31109
>  > I prepared a patch for the releases/gcc-13 branch.
>  > Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> rejected my patch for
> this branch.
>  > Which branch should I use? master, trunk or something else?

toplevel changes are synced between binutils/gcc master branches only

> Do you really need gprofng in the gcc repo ?
> if yes:
>    the fix is trivial.
>    I did for the releases/gcc-13 branch:
>       git cherry-pick 24552056fd5fc677c0d032f54a5cad1c4303d312
>    Can anyone do the same for the correct branch.
>    I have no write permissions for gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
>
>    I maintain binutils-gdb/gprofng. Who will maintain gcc/gprofng ?

It's maintained in the binutils-gdb repository.  Shared files are synced
as said above.

I've never seen us care for release branches in the GCC repository,
combined builds are not really "supported" (or even tested regularly).

> If no:
>   may I close 31109 ?

So yes, I'd say that's an INVALID bug since it doesn't use master
branches on both sides.

Richard.

> Thank you,
> -Vladimir
>
> .
>

Re: About 31109 - gprofng not built and installed in a combined binutils+gcc build

[Sam James]

Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 4:46 AM Vladimir Mezentsev
> <vladimir.mezentsev@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I asked in https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31109
>>  > I prepared a patch for the releases/gcc-13 branch.
>>  > Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> rejected my patch for
>> this branch.
>>  > Which branch should I use? master, trunk or something else?
>
> toplevel changes are synced between binutils/gcc master branches only
>
>> Do you really need gprofng in the gcc repo ?
>> if yes:
>>    the fix is trivial.
>>    I did for the releases/gcc-13 branch:
>>       git cherry-pick 24552056fd5fc677c0d032f54a5cad1c4303d312
>>    Can anyone do the same for the correct branch.
>>    I have no write permissions for gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
>>
>>    I maintain binutils-gdb/gprofng. Who will maintain gcc/gprofng ?
>
> It's maintained in the binutils-gdb repository.  Shared files are synced
> as said above.
>
> I've never seen us care for release branches in the GCC repository,
> combined builds are not really "supported" (or even tested regularly).
>
>> If no:
>>   may I close 31109 ?
>
> So yes, I'd say that's an INVALID bug since it doesn't use master
> branches on both sides.
>

wfm - we don't use them at all and I've also never expected syncs
to happen for non-master.

> Richard.
>
>> Thank you,
>> -Vladimir
>>
>> .
>>

best,
sam