X-Originating-IP:	[213.224.83.18]
From:	"Tim Van Holder" <zastai AT hotmail DOT com>
To:	"Andris Pavenis" <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
Cc:	<djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
References:	<Pine DOT A41 DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 10009060921480 DOT 44168-100000 AT ieva06 DOT lanet DOT lv>
Subject:	Re: Is there an interest in binutils snapshots?
Date:	Thu, 7 Sep 2000 18:38:11 +0200
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Message-ID:	<OE22SKqGABtvNLepTya000016fb@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	07 Sep 2000 16:35:35.0767 (UTC) FILETIME=[A5FD6E70:01C018E9]
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> > For some time now, I've been keeping my binutils port up to date using
> > the daily diffs from Cygnus. Since the source tree is on my HD anyway,
>
> CVS is better tool than daily diffs for this purpose.
Correct, but this requires a netwoking-enabled version of CVS, which is
not yet available for DJGPP users (although it looks like libsockets will
soon support WinSock2 well enough to make this possible).
Also, it's much easier to edit the diffs (I only allow them to update
my configure.in files, as they'll fail on configure anyway - I test my
patched autoconf on this tree) than to look for and resolve merging
problems. CVS is really only useful here if a) you're a maintainer and can
just check in your patches or b) you only need the unchanged sources.

> > I would suggest uploading a weekly snapshot somewhere (probably
> > an i-drive account, unless someone wants to donate about 11MB of web
> > space).
> > Alternatively, if there is sufficient interest, it could also be put in
the
> > beta or alpha subdirs on simtelnet.
> >
>
> I don't see any special reason why one cannot use CVS to update binutils
> sources or download daily snapshots from
> ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/binutils/snapshots/ (or one of mirror sites).
> So I think there is NO NEED to duplicate this service somewhere else.
Kinda depends - the diffs can fail horribly if you use patched versions of
some files (libtool, autoconf, Cygnus configure). Also, getting a pre-DJGPP
configured source tree is more convenient than getting the latest snapshot
and configuring it (it may configure and build in 5 minutes on a fast Linux,
but on DOS/Win9x the configuration alone can take more than 10 minutes).

> Putting DJGPP binaries of binutils snapshots somewhere may be
> interesting for some poeple (I think not for many though, but it can be
> not so). I myself can build binutils for DJGPP from current CVS sources
> when I want that so I'm not very interested also in such possibility.
That's right - I had forgotten that binutils doesn't really need patching
anymore. Forget I suggested it - those that really want the latest versions
can indeed just use the alternative methods above.

---------
Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
:)

- Raw text -