This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: copyright dates in binutils (and includes/)
- From: Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>
- To: binutils at sourceware dot org, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, rsandifo at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com
- Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 23:03:59 +1030
- Subject: Re: copyright dates in binutils (and includes/)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140227045011 dot GC14922 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <20140227132551 dot GO4348 at adacore dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1402271845060 dot 27019 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20140228085652 dot GI14922 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <20140228130844 dot GA4893 at adacore dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1402281818151 dot 14521 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20140303034451 dot GD5934 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <20140303041639 dot GA26922 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <877g8bxv8h dot fsf at sandifor-thinkpad dot stglab dot manchester dot uk dot ibm dot com>
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 01:33:18PM +0000, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Alan Modra <email@example.com> writes:
> > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 02:14:51PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> >> I'll post update-copyright.py separately.
> Thanks for doing this, looks good to me FWIW. I don't know whether
> we want to keep a single script for both GCC and binutils+gdb or fork,
> but probably separate copies makes sense.
I guess we have 8 months to decide what to do with my hacks. :-) If
you choose to merge my changes that's fine by me too.
> As far as including include/ goes: the only reason that didn't happen
> for gcc/ was because I didn't want to sort out which files were GCC-
> specific and whether binutils, GCC or GDB was the master for each file.
> So if we do your option (b) I think we should do (c) as well. I suppose
> that means syncing GCC's include/ with binutils+gdb and then adding
> GCC's include/ to the list of "approved" directories. I'm happy to try
> that if it sounds OK. (Maybe after the 4.9 release, not sure.)
I'm happy with (c, but for now have committed just the other changes.
Australia Development Lab, IBM