This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


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

Re: What is on the 5.1 branch; Was: [rfc] Re: read_register_bytes() bug; was my Regcache revamp


> Which patch came after which is implied by
>> the order in which the entries appear in the ChangeLog file.
> 
> 
> That order can be messed up by snafus such as CVS conflicts etc.
> 
> Why is it such a problem to label the entries with the date when the
> change is committed?  I don't see any disadvantages to this, only
> advantages

The disadvantage I'm aware of occures when you're trying to determine if 
a specific change has been committed (I tend to be doing this a lot). 
The date (especially the pre ISO date which included the time) makes a 
really good identifying stamp.  Per other e-mail, this is why I'll 
retain the date-stamp when committing a patch.  I'll even occasionally do:

> 2001-03-19  Andrew Cagney  <ac131313@redhat.com>
> 
>         From Mon Nov 20 13:59:29 2000 Andrew Cagney <cagney@b1.cygnus.com>:

:-)
	Andrew



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