Re: Strange binutils-2_16-branch and related tags

[Jie Zhang <jie dot zhang at analog dot com>]

Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Jie Zhang <jie.zhang@analog.com> writes:
>
> > I just found a strange thing on binutils-2_16-branch and the related tags,
> > like binutils-2_16-branchpoint, binutils-2_16, binutils-2_16_1. On some
> > files, binutils-2_16-branchpoint was set on a revision in 2007, but
> > binutils-2.16 was released in 2005. On such files, there are no
> > binutils-2_16 or binutils-2_16_1 tags. This occurs for some files in
> > binutils (dwarf.c, dwarf.h, etc.) and opcodes (bfin-dis.c, i386-opc.c,
> > etc.) and maybe more others.
>
> Looks like these files should not have the binutils-2_16-branchpoint tag
> at all.  Apparently the tag was added on or after 2007-07-24
> (binutils/i386-gen.c has the latest revision for this tag).
Yeah. It seems binutils-2_16-branchpoint was moved accidentally on some 
day in 2007. If we want to move binutils to SVN or even git, we have to 
undo the accident and recover the history. I don't know if it's 
possible. Are the tag commands logged in binutils-cvs mailing list? I 
searched the mailing list but found nothing related to branchpoint.


Jie