This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org 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] |
Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> writes:Thanks for point out that. The test result on my local repository mirror looks OK. So I have removed TAG binutils-2_16-branchpoint from the files I listed in my last email plus binutils/rclex.c and binutils/po/ro.po.
Jie Zhang <jie.zhang@analog.com> writes:
It seems you are right. Below is the list of all the files which should not have TAG binutils-2_16-branchpoint. They are just the new files when comparing TAG binutils-2_16-branchpoint against TAG binutils-2_16. I'll first try on a local repository mirror next week.The file binutils/rclex.c is special. It was previously a generated file only checked into branches, but appeared later on the trunk as a non-generated file. This file should not have that tag either.
Another special file is binutils/po/ro.po, which appeared simultanously on trunk and binutils-2_16-branch after the branchpoint.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |