ct-ng -> git repos instead of single patches

[Arnaud Lacombe]

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Yann E. MORIN
<yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr> wrote:
> All,
>
> On Thursday 12 August 2010 23:37:38 Allan Clark wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 09:22, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
>> > I completely disagree here. These local changes still have to be
>> > extracted to patches, and these patches have to be put into the
>> > proper places. If ct-ng would take it's sources from git, all one
>> > needs to do is to change the ref name.
>
> OK, just a quick jump-in, now...
>
> When I build a toolchain, what I *do* want is for the toolchain to be
> based on _upstream_, and know what changes _I_ am doing to these.
>
no, I'm sorry, you do not know what change your toolchains have. Take
glibc 2.10.1. I _do_ challenge you to assure me you did a full review
the 57 different patch currently applied, totalizing  +867 lines, -282
lines, spread over 123 unique files. Take glibc 2.9, same story, +458
lines, -264 lines, over 91 unique files.

Both comments said "vampirize patches from gentoo". Even if I was
trusting you, I am not trusting gentoo -> I am not trusting the glibc
you are shipping.

 - Arnaud

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq