Am 25.04.2014 16:54, schrieb Ludovic Brenta: > On Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:37:38 +0100, Ludovic Brenta wrote: >> Matthias Klose wrote: >>> Please don't break GCC snapshot builds by not applying needed >>> patches for the snapshot builds. At least the ppc64el build is >>> broken, now fixed in the vcs. I didn't check other targets like, >>> arm, mips, the Hurd and KFreeBSD. >> >> Could you please elaborate on what exactly caused the breakage? I >> specifically made as many patches as possible unconditional and >> applied them as early as possible. You moved ada-ppc64el from >> unconditional, early to unconditional, late. Therefore I assume that >> there is a conflict between ada-ppc64el and some other patch that is >> applied only on snapshot builds? Perhaps the problem is with this >> other patch, then? > > Actually I noticed the following only now:
thanks. so you should be aware of it from now on ;) > [lots of patches including all Ada- and Go-related patches...] no, not all. > I think this construct is *extremely* error-prone; this line blindly > erases the carefully-crafted debian_patches variable and starts > afresh. In my opinion, the only patches that should be applied only > on the stable branch are svn-updates.diff and the various backporting > patches; err, so which ones should not be applied? > all_branch_patches = gcc-textdomain # note: currently "stable only"; why? because I don't have the resources to keep this updated for the trunk on a regular basis, and for this particular case it's not needed. The gcc-snapshot package is a cheap way to have a snapshot installable on the developer machines and porter boxes. Best thing would be to have as few patches as possible, but that would require some active upstreaming ... I asked about that already. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/535a8ddf.4030...@debian.org
