This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFA: gold version number
- From: Tristan Gingold <gingold at adacore dot com>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, Cary Coutant <ccoutant at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 11:57:52 +0100
- Subject: Re: RFA: gold version number
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAJimCsG=7Ro1stj8d8Phzi1oFVS+5TOZ0eTFd+t1RS_HYoiS9Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAKOQZ8y1LhHw=TdOTi_sBzJf-uG7v3RT8KC6TXENYOk=-__gdg at mail dot gmail dot com>
> On 25 Mar 2016, at 06:07, Ian Lance Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Cary Coutant <email@example.com> wrote:
>> I've been neglecting gold's version number, which has been stuck at
>> 1.11 for ages. I don't really have significant changes anymore that
>> would trigger an obvious version number bump, but a
>> consistently-incremented version number would still be useful for
>> tracking purposes. I suppose I could just remove it and show only the
>> binutils version number, but I think it's probably better to keep a
>> version number of its own.
>> But what strategy should I use for incrementing it? I've thought about
>> bumping it just before each binutils release branch is cut, or perhaps
>> just after, but I'm not sure how to remind myself to do that at the
>> right moment.
>> How should the version number distinguish between a release branch
>> build and a trunk build? Are there any hooks built in to git or
>> automake that would allow commit ids or datestamps to be included
>> automatically in the version string?
>> Any advice?
> I don't have any advice about automatic updates. There must be some
> sort of binutils release checklist.
But it would be simpler if gold were using bfd/version.m4