This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Confusion regarding gdb_5_1_1-2002-01-24-release tag
- From: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Cc: Paul Hilfinger <hilfingr at gnat dot com>,gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 18:24:18 +0100
- Subject: Re: Confusion regarding gdb_5_1_1-2002-01-24-release tag
- References: <20020312104857.1D75BF28C9@nile.gnat.com><3C8E2887.10001@cygnus.com>
Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:
|> > No doubt this question simply reflects my aversion to CVS, but here goes:
|> > a cvs log run on gdb/value.h shows that tag gdb_5_1_1-2002-01-24-release
|> > is defined as 1.21. Revision 1.21 of gdb/value.h is dated 2001/05/21.
|> > Revision 1.26 is dated 2002/01/04. This appears not to be the only
|> > example. What gives?
|> > Thanks.
|>
|> Looking at the branch/point tags:
|>
|> gdb_5_1-2001-07-29-branch: 1.20.0.4
|> gdb_5_1-2001-07-29-branchpoint: 1.20
|>
|> gdb_5_1_1-2002-01-24-release: 1.20
|>
|> GDB's releases are drawn from a branch. After the branch was cut a number
|> of changes on the trunk were made but never on the branch.
|>
|> See if you can find a tool for browsing CVS branches (tkcvs on
|> sourceforge?, others?). It makes life a lot easier.
The viewcvs interface on savannah has a pretty nice feature: you can get
a graphical revision tree for a file. Maybe this could be made available
on sourceware as well.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE GmbH, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."