This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com 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]

Re: CVS branches and versioning


2.15.90 is the precursor to 2.16

2.14.90 is the precursor to 2.15

-eric

On Mon, 2004-03-08 at 14:46, Al Stone wrote:
> I am very confused.  Let me embarass myself for a moment...
> 
> If I check out a copy of binutils from CVS with:
> 
>   $ export CVSROOT=:pserver:anoncvs@sources.redhat.com:/cvs/src
>   $ cvs login
>   $ cvs -z9 co binutils
> 
> I get binutils 2.15.90 (well, not entirely -- the make fails
> on ia64 Linux, but that's another problem); bfd/configure 
> contains 2.15.90 for the VERSION value and all the executables
> built report it as they should, e.g.:
> 
>    $ ar --version
>    GNU ar 2.15.90 20040305
>    ...
> 
> So far, so good.  This makes some sense -- mainline for
> the tree should be the upcoming version.
> 
> Here's the problem: if I check out with the 2.15 branch
> tag like so:
> 
>    $ cvs -z9 co -rbinutils-2_15-branch binutils
> 
> And then build this source version, I get 2.14.90, _not_
> 2.15 (bfd/configure does say 2.14.90).  For example:
> 
>    $ ar --version
>    GNU ar 2.14.90 20040218
>    ...
> 
> I just repeated this about 10 minutes ago, just to make
> sure I wasn't doing something silly.
> 
> Isn't this backwards?  Or am I just misunderstanding
> something horribly?  I'm hoping it's the latter...
> 
> Thanks in advance.
-- 
Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>


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