On 07/25/16 04:42, Martin Liška wrote:
I like the change suggested by Jakub, I've updated the numbering scheme, as well
as comments in gcov-io.h.
ok. I'm not too fussed about a problem that is 25 years away and would result
in contusion of code (then) instrumented 30 years ago.
nathan
a04d82617373077280ec495 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin <mli...@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:54:20 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Adapt the numbering scheme (PR gcov-profile/64874)
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-07-22 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
PR gcov-profile/64874
* gcov-io.h: Upda
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 01:46:44PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> As described in the PR, current numbering scheme in gcov-io.h would overflow
> in couple of years.
> Thus, I'm suggesting to switch from:
>
> [major][minor/10][minor%10][release_status]
>
> to:
>
On 07/22/16 07:46, Martin Liška wrote:
Hi.
As described in the PR, current numbering scheme in gcov-io.h would overflow in
couple of years.
Thus, I'm suggesting to switch from:
[major][minor/10][minor%10][release_status]
to:
[major/10][major%10][minor][release_status]
If I'm reading that
regression tests.
Ready to be installed?
Martin
>From 3e35f8f08558d95f5d6bd674f659c976ea86f311 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin <mli...@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:54:20 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Adapt the numbering scheme (PR gcov-profile/64874)
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-07-22 Martin Li
