This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [RFC] src-release.sh: Convert src-release to a shell script
- From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- To: Will Newton <will dot newton at linaro dot org>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 05:49:17 -0700
- Subject: Re: [RFC] src-release.sh: Convert src-release to a shell script
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1407419590-27223-1-git-send-email-will dot newton at linaro dot org>
> 2014-08-07 Will Newton <email@example.com>
> * src-release.sh: New file.
Generally speaking, I tend to agree that a makefile is slightly
overkill for this task. The contents of the makefile is fairly
straightforward though, and outside of variable VEC in the makefile,
you script doesn't look any simpler than the makefile... What
I appreciate, however, is the lack of make recursions (with
the associated multiple "make" processes).
Give it another week for people to comment on, and then let's get
this in (I'll take care of talking to Tristan when he comes back).
Also, let's delete the old src-release script.
Some relatively trivial comments below:
> diff --git a/src-release.sh b/src-release.sh
> new file mode 100755
> index 0000000..3d41269
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/src-release.sh
> @@ -0,0 +1,353 @@
Can you use /usr/bin/env? People trying to create tarballs for their
own might not be doing it on a GNU/Linux machine, and so bash might
be installed elsewhere.
> +# Copyright (C) 1990-2014 Free Software Foundation
> +# This file is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> +# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> +# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> +# (at your option) any later version.
> +# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> +# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> +# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> +# GNU General Public License for more details.
> +# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> +# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> +# Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA.
The copyright year range looks correct to me, but the license
should be GPLv3.