This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: intl directory: gcc vs. src

> > What do people who build in a combined tree do with intl?  Do they use
> > the GCC version or the src tree version?  Is there any consensus about
> > whether or not there should be a single version of intl, and if so,
> > which one should be used?
> Yes, there should be a single version of intl.  I don't think anybody
> cares which version is used, as long as it works.  If you have taken
> the time to test a unified intl, and are prepared to fix any problems,
> I think your patch would be great.
> Ian

OK, I can sign up for that.  While looking at the changes needed for the
text in the MAINTAINERS file, I saw the following entry for libiberty:

| libiberty/; libiberty's part of include/
|        gcc:
|        Changes need to be done in tandem with the official GCC
|        sources or submitted to the master file maintainer and brought
|        in via a merge.  Note: approved patches in gcc's libiberty
|        are automatically approved in this libiberty also; feel free
|        to merge them yourself if needed sooner than the next merge.
|        Otherwise, changes are automatically merged, usually within
|        a day.

Can someone tell me about this automatic merge?  I was going to submit a
formal patch to change the contents of src/intl but it seems that if we
have an automatic merge to copy libiberty from gcc to src, we could do
the same for intl (and src/config.rhost) and then I wouldn't need to do
any actual checkins for those changes.  If we can do that then the only
thing I would need to change by hand would be the intl text that is in

Who maintains this automatic merge process?

Steve Ellcey

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]