Figure out what to do about upstream merge of binutils and gdb. |
|||
Issue descriptionUpstream, binutils and gdb are now merged and development happens in a single repo: https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git Also, see: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/34037219/why-were-gnu-binutils-and-gdb-merged-as-one-package We have separate ebuilds for sys-devel/binutils and sys-devel/gdb, which presumably build from different points in the history of the same upstream repo. Is this a cause for concern? Should we do anything to merge these together? Is Gentoo upstream planning to do something for this in portage-stable?
,
Sep 13 2016
while binutils and gdb have a single git repo, they still maintain their own release processes. they've been this way longer than git -- when it was on CVS, it was a single source repo for binutils, gdb, and a lot more projects. trying to take a single git sha1 and do all project builds from it runs against the release process of each project. i've seen it tried a few times over the years at different companies and it was always a failure (either binutils is stable and gdb is not, or gdb is stable and binutils is not, or neither is stable -- it's rare for both to be stable). i don't see a problem with there being two independent packages here.
,
Sep 27 2017
@rahul, should this be closed?
,
Sep 27 2017
Yes, as Mike said, binutils and gdb share a repository for convenience, but have different release schedules etc. |
|||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||
Comment 1 by llozano@chromium.org
, Sep 13 2016