This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: GDB 7.6.90 available for testing
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- Cc: brobecker at adacore dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 19:53:29 +0000
- Subject: Re: GDB 7.6.90 available for testing
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140108101428 dot C2280E003F at joel dot gnat dot com> <831u0ec2y6 dot fsf at gnu dot org> <52D427A4 dot 6010704 at redhat dot com> <83wqi368k7 dot fsf at gnu dot org> <52D43408 dot 404 at redhat dot com> <83vbxn67ij dot fsf at gnu dot org> <83sisr66ci dot fsf at gnu dot org>
On 01/13/2014 07:15 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 20:50:28 +0200
>> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>> Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>>
>> Is there any difference between merge and cherry-pick in this case?
merge would attempt to merge the whole of master into the branch
starting from the branching point.
> It seems msysgit's cherry-pick somehow converted gdbserver/ChangeLog
> to DOS CRLF EOL format. So I needed one additional commit on the
> branch to fix that, before pushing. Is that OK, or should I have done
> something different?
Ouch, sounds like a git bug...
Yeah, it would have been better if that broken EOL change
hadn't made it into the repository. E.g., now "git blame"
on gdbserver's ChangeLog will show that commit as author
of all of the file's lines. Luckily, as it was on the branch,
not master, it probably won't ever affect anyone. You could,
for example, have squashed those two commits into one (with git
rebase) before pushing, ending up with a single commit that
looked just like the one in master. Oh well, what's done is
done now. ;-)
--
Pedro Alves