From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10237 invoked by alias); 4 Oct 2004 21:16:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 10230 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2004 21:16:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 4 Oct 2004 21:16:06 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1CEaBi-00053m-Eo; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 17:16:06 -0400 Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 21:27:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Felix Lee Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB/MI snapshots between major release's Message-ID: <20041004211606.GB16453@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Felix Lee , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20041003163918.GB7030@white> <01c4a9ce$Blat.v2.2.2$d01969a0@zahav.net.il> <20041004131906.GB8121@white> <20041004145921.BAC77502AB6@stray.canids> <20041004154928.GE8121@white> <20041004160455.DD23A502AB6@stray.canids> <20041004164803.GG8121@white> <20041004181201.9A8E9502AB6@stray.canids> <20041004183145.GH8121@white> <20041004205357.1FBCD502AB6@stray.canids> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041004205357.1FBCD502AB6@stray.canids> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00065.txt.bz2 On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 01:53:57PM -0700, Felix Lee wrote: > Bob Rossi : > > T1 GDB 7.0 has MI10 (official) > > T2 GDB 7.0-CVS has MI11 (unofficial, because of MI incompatible change X1 ) > > T3 GDB 7.0-CVS has MI11 (unofficial, because of MI incompatible change X2 ) > > T4 GDB 7.1 has MI11 (official) > > why would that happen? I expect 'create a new MI version' to be > basically an atomic change. like, someone experiments with MI11 > on a branch, then merges it into the trunk when it's stable and > tests reasonable cleanly. > > if the incompatible change is simple enough to be done in the > trunk, then updating the version and the testsuite should be part > of the same commit. Except that's not how it's done. Someone else explained how the version numbers work upthread - the latest one may be evolving. -- Daniel Jacobowitz