Re: glibc-ports-merge branch available for testing

[Allan McRae <allan at archlinux dot org>]

On 01/07/12 23:31, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> I've pushed the glibc-ports-merge branch that has the contents of the 
> ports repository in the ports/ directory.  Please review this and see if 
> it is as you expect.  There is a tag glibc-2.16-ports-merge at the tip of 
> the branch; that tip revision is expected to become the tip of master if 
> the merge is OK.

This looks good to me.

> I've verified that the branch contents are indeed what you get from the 
> release tarballs.  "git blame" works on files in ports.  "git log 
> --follow" works on files where there isn't a file of the same name in 
> libc; for files such as ports/Makefile it appears to prefer to show 
> (before the move into the ports directory) the history of libc's file of 
> that name rather than of the ports version.

I tried to find a solution for this without success. But there are
relatively few files involved and we still have the ports repo to go
back to if really necessary.

For the record, the following files are affected by this:

.gitignore
ChangeLog
Makefile
README
sysdeps/powerpc/dl-procinfo.c
sysdeps/powerpc/dl-procinfo.h
sysdeps/powerpc/powerpc32/Makefile


Allan