From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mav.lukeshu.com (mav.lukeshu.com [IPv6:2001:19f0:5c00:8069:5400:ff:fe26:6a86]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 600C23946A42; Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:53:58 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 600C23946A42 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lukeshu.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lukeshu.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 600C23946A42 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2001:19f0:5c00:8069:5400:ff:fe26:6a86 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1717746839; cv=none; b=GIBQP6a4beFR1qFM+T6I3q+JjZyj4pBrPRrnyNqg6/242yICxyIFYp5UBdaQrn/p25XtnW3A6nFIwja4J+fJUGzYmM3tLU4DTrFGCpt5mdRmN5WBC1D9u+OfM4o5m72zvm1v/8edJaSlD3kiXXQlnp+YtzGQpBDUQ3LbjJ9YV+A= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1717746839; c=relaxed/simple; bh=akmdXeklVmm4OzDpaE6qgVOwdFT56+hZvD8+f22A1NI=; h=Date:Message-ID:From:To:Subject:MIME-Version; b=urV2Bw4enOL/vLmCPu2FXq/D7lGDdeDlo569RB2KZe7I9Gjk7llzubpbzOCClKA3pjIP/mUfx4bPSt/Ge+uykExxW+epuZp1cfmzEOnptUOdJGTd3OJceXV4WE0aM+s3Ea+JUWMZPwUlDVd1tSQoR3ObVqnZK2dgd5CGbiSyFOk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from lukeshu-thinkpad-e15 (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:5e01:2a5d:aee0:10ff:fe55:8023]) by mav.lukeshu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A57918067B; Fri, 7 Jun 2024 03:53:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2024 01:53:56 -0600 Message-ID: <87cyotdw8b.wl-lukeshu@lukeshu.com> From: Luke T. Shumaker To: Jan Beulich Cc: "Luke T. Shumaker" , "Alfred M. Szmidt" , Ralf Wildenhues , Tom Tromey , binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] zlib: Remove files that should certainly not be checked in In-Reply-To: References: <20240606201145.1747021-1-lukeshu@lukeshu.com> <20240606201145.1747021-4-lukeshu@lukeshu.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/29.3 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Fri, 07 Jun 2024 00:24:53 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 06.06.2024 22:11, Luke T. Shumaker wrote: > > The *.obj files are compiled binaries that should have been > > .gitignore'd > > Are you sure about this? readme.txt in each of the directories > suggests otherwise to me. More precisely, while removing them > from the .git tree might be okay, provisions would then first > need taking for them to be re-generated properly when > releases / tarballs are made. Since that requires some form > of Windows to run MASM, doing so likely wouldn't nicely > integrate into the overall process. Good question. Here's my reasoning about how sure I am: - The readme.txt's read to me as telling the user to use MASM, not that they are included. - AFAICT, these files are not used by binutils-gdb. - As shown in the final commit of this patch series, the zlib directory is perfectly re-created *except for these files* by extracting zlib-1.2.12.tar over zlib-1.2.10.tar. Neither of those tarballs include any .obj files. - These files were first added to binutils-gdb.git from gcc.git in 5ca28f79288 (Import zlib from GCC, H.J. Lu, 2015-03-13), which is is a faithful (except for some $Id$ mangling) of zlib-1.2.7.tar. That tarball does not include any .obj files either. - However, zlib tarballs did include some .obj files in the v1.2.[0-3] range. - And whadayaknow, the .obj files were first added to gcc.git in 303ae446cf2a (Initial revision, Tom Tromey, 2005-09-12), which bundled zlib-1.2.1.tar (which as I just said is indeed one of the archives that includes .obj files). - Ever since being first checked in to gcc.git/binutils-gdb.git, the .obj files have never once been updated, even though the associated assembly source code has had substantial revisions. > Further, if these really were to be .gitignore-d, wouldn't the > patch sensibly be adding them (perhaps as *.obj pattern) to > .gitignore? Yes, that would be a good thing to do. This patch series IMO highlights a lot of good things to do. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke T. Shumaker