https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #25 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Hi Nick,
I still think this patch could be made simpler. Please consider and comment my
message at 2024-08-02.
In short, any kind of tarball (release, snapshot, nightly, etc.) should be made
with the
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: rostiprodev at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
After running this script permissions of all files and directories (including
files of Git repo and the
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
Rostislav Krasny changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rostiprodev at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #2 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Hi Nick,
The "core.sharedRepository" configuration property of Git allows to override
user’s umask value for all tracked files and their directories in the Git
repository, i.e. how they are created in
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #3 from Rostislav Krasny ---
In case you can't guarantee the "core.sharedRepository" configuration property
was set properly before the src-release.sh was ran you can, in addition to
setting umask in its beginning, also set the "co
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #5 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Created attachment 15549
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15549&action=edit
formatted patch with the fix
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the b
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #6 from Rostislav Krasny ---
The 'git reset --hard' works not stable. Sometimes it changes permissions
according to umask or to the git configuration, sometimes it doesn't. So I made
another fix.
I've attached a formatted patch wi
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #8 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #7)
>
> There is just one thing though, in order to accept it we either need it
> signed with a Developer Certificate of Origin or else you need to complete a
>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #9 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Created attachment 15559
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15559&action=edit
formatted patch with the optimized fix
This is the final patch.
Please use it instead of the previous.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #10 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Meanwhile I've made an optimized version of the patch.
In the first version I calculated the new octal number of permissions and
called the printf(1) again and again, for each file and directory in th
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #11 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Rostislav Krasny from comment #8)
> (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #7)
> >
> > There is just one thing though, in order to accept it we either need it
> > signed with a Developer
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
Rostislav Krasny changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #15549|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #15 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #14)
> Hi Rostislav,
>
> Thanks for the updated patch and the DCO. I have now applied your patch
> to the sources.
Thank you too for accepting my first contr
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #16 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Created attachment 15566
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15566&action=edit
additional improvement
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
Rostislav Krasny changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31800
--- Comment #19 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Thank you Nick!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
: normal
Priority: P2
Component: admin
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: rostiprodev at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
There are many daily automatic commits that continuously change one single line
with definition of the BFD_VERSION_DATE
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
Rostislav Krasny changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rostiprodev at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #4 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #3)
>
> I do like the idea of the configure file generating the bfd/version.h file
> automatically however, so if someone wants to write a potential patch that
> w
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #5 from Rostislav Krasny ---
What exact command is used to generate the /configure script from the
/configure.ac file?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #8 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Created attachment 15596
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15596&action=edit
patch
Please try this patch. It has changes in the configure.ac file only. The
generated configure scr
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #9 from Rostislav Krasny ---
> Well to be precise, it is the bfd/configure.ac file that ought to contain
> the code to generate the version.h file. (Since the top level configure.ac
> file is shared with the gcc project, and that
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #10 from Rostislav Krasny ---
The general idea of my patch is adding the AC_CONFIG_COMMANDS_PRE block into
the configure.ac file that then adds the appropriate shell code into the
generated configure script. That shell code should
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #13 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #11)
> Created attachment 15616 [details]
> Proposed patch
>
> Sorry for dropping this.
>
> I have uploaded a revised version of your patch which:
>
> 1. Mov
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #14 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #12)
> That won't work with a snapshot.
Is it the same to what I tried to fix in my previous message?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #18 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #17)
> Created attachment 15626 [details]
> Proposed patch
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> OK, what do you think of this version ?
>
> It incorporates Rostilav's suggeste
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #20 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #19)
> > If any source tarball created by the src-release.sh it already contains
> > the generated version.h file with properly generated VERSION_DATE from
> >
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #22 from Rostislav Krasny ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #21)
> > Ok. Then what is the reason of generating VERSION_DATE from ChangeLog.git or
> > from the current date?
>
> These methods are meant to handle the case w
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31881
--- Comment #23 from Rostislav Krasny ---
Hi,
Is there any update regarding this ticket?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
29 matches
Mail list logo
