From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25954 invoked by alias); 28 Jan 2011 19:40:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 25946 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jan 2011 19:40:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 19:40:04 +0000 Received: (qmail 27427 invoked from network); 28 Jan 2011 19:40:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digraph.polyomino.org.uk) (joseph@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 28 Jan 2011 19:40:03 -0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PiuAr-0006sL-JS; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 19:40:01 +0000 Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 20:42:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Gerald Pfeifer cc: Gary Funck , Gcc Patches Subject: Re: gcc_release script, snapshots, and LAST_UPDATED version In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20101220014438.GI24726@intrepid.com> <20101220160327.GX24726@intrepid.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg02148.txt.bz2 On Fri, 28 Jan 2011, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > why do we want to use Revision: and not Last Changed Rev: to describe > the branch and accordingly make the following change to gcc_snapshot? I have nothing to add here. As far as I am concerned this is a bikeshed discussion; these things work and there is no use in changing them. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com