I'm surprised the binutils patches don't work since I wouldn't expect any upstream changes to affect the msp430 files, but I can only provide patches against the upstream release that's part of the initial LTS release. If you apply them against some other version, I hope the version numbers you use make it clear that what you have isn't a supported release from the perspective of mspgcc.
There is no versioning on patches that apply to an LTS release. It is simply a collection of validated and back-ported solutions to specific problems, provided as a convenience to people trying to support that release for a specific installation (OS distribution or individual user). The overhead of preparing and pushing releases is too much to add yet another level of version numbering. I'd originally intended the list of patches in that email to be just the ones I hadn't previously announced here, but changed the description at the last minute without verifying the list. What's in the Patches directory is canonical. Peter On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Luca BRUNO <lu...@debian.org> wrote: > Peter Bigot scrisse: > > > New LTS/20110716 patches have been posted. > > I've been on vacation lately, so I'm catching up with your LTS-plus- > patches right now. For some packages (eg. binutils) I'm forced to > refresh your patches against FSF's binutils cvs trunk, as the maintainer > is actively tracking it, so I can't directly use your patch-files :(. > > IMHO It would be useful, at least to me, if you please would stick tags > on different LTS patchlevel. Something along the line of the list > below... > > *** > Example on branch LTS/20110716 of binutils: > (git-tag -> git-commit) > > lts-20110716 -> 8b3b41a69905eeab5e723129f5fd7e5761f28309 > lts-20110716p1 -> 7e144e8efaa78433e2f9288c2ce8e0de40ce763c > lts-20110716p2 -> 7e144e8efaa78433e2f9288c2ce8e0de40ce763c > *** > > This would help having a more consistent naming, even when packagers are > forced to use newer FSF's sources (as you have already seen with gcc > 4.5.3). > > Moreover, your quoted mail was lacking SF-3379341 among binutils > patches, but README correctly lists it. > > Cheers, Luca > > -- > .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Luca Bruno (kaeso) > : :' : The Universal O.S. | lucab (AT) debian.org > `. `'` | GPG Key ID: 3BFB9FB3 > `- http://www.debian.org | Debian GNU/Linux Developer > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model > configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and > the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free > download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Mspgcc-users mailing list > Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
