On May 12, 2015 5:58:07 PM GMT+02:00, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Michael Matz <m...@suse.de> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, 12 May 2015, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >>> >> So we have >>> >> >>> >> experimental >>> >> release >>> >> post-release >>> >> >>> >> Why not just rename prerelease to post-release? That is a >one-line >>> >> change. >>> > >>> > Why print anything at all? 5.1.1 is after 5.1.0 in obvious ways. >>> > >>> >>> How can you tell GCC 5.1.1 on May 1, 2015 from GCC 5.1.1 >>> on May 12, 2015? >> >> Via the svn revision. But as the subject says, this patch is not so >much > >So? Doesn't post-release display the svn revision.for gcc -v, which >gcc -v doesn't display today? Something like this > >diff --git a/gcc/DEV-PHASE b/gcc/DEV-PHASE >index e69de29..ee176f8 100644 >--- a/gcc/DEV-PHASE >+++ b/gcc/DEV-PHASE >@@ -0,0 +1 @@ >+post-release
Printing post-release doesn't add any information. I believe Jakub fixed the missing svn revision printing already. Richard. > >> about the --version output (though it changes it in IMO sensible >way), but >> rather about file and directory names, so that they are based only on >the >> major version, not on the micro version (where major before gcc5 was >X.Y, >> and now is only X). >> >> >> Ciao, >> Michael.
