Re: [RFC] Linaro release version number macros

2014-11-05 Thread Yvan Roux
Hi, Thanks for the feedback, in theory it is possible to have more than one spin in day but in practice I really think/hope it will never happen, and yes spin numbers are a strictly monotonically increasing sequence. The date format is an option but I think that having a mismatch between these ma

Re: [RFC] Linaro release version number macros

2014-10-24 Thread Christopher Covington
On 10/24/2014 10:20 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On 23 October 2014 12:00, Will Newton wrote: >> On 23 October 2014 10:44, Yvan Roux wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> after the recent lkml thread on blacklisting some GCC versions (see >>> below) and the issue in identifying accurately our releases, I propos

Re: [RFC] Linaro release version number macros

2014-10-24 Thread Christophe Lyon
On 23 October 2014 12:00, Will Newton wrote: > On 23 October 2014 10:44, Yvan Roux wrote: >> Hi, >> >> after the recent lkml thread on blacklisting some GCC versions (see >> below) and the issue in identifying accurately our releases, I propose >> to add some Linaro specific macros in our branche

Re: [RFC] Linaro release version number macros

2014-10-23 Thread Maxim Kuvyrkov
On Oct 23, 2014, at 10:44 PM, Yvan Roux wrote: > Hi, > > after the recent lkml thread on blacklisting some GCC versions (see > below) and the issue in identifying accurately our releases, I propose > to add some Linaro specific macros in our branches (i.e this patch > will not go upstream) to be

Re: [RFC] Linaro release version number macros

2014-10-23 Thread Will Newton
On 23 October 2014 10:44, Yvan Roux wrote: > Hi, > > after the recent lkml thread on blacklisting some GCC versions (see > below) and the issue in identifying accurately our releases, I propose > to add some Linaro specific macros in our branches (i.e this patch > will not go upstream) to be able