Hi!
We have found that the Git 'gcc-9_1_0-release' tag doesn't correspond to
the actual GCC 9.1 release. The GCC 9.1 release (as per 'gcc-9.1.0.tar'
as well as 'svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/tags/gcc_9_1_0_release',
r272156) would correspond to Git commit
3defceaa1a2987fa90296abfbcc85d7e9ad59684
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:13, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> We have found that the Git 'gcc-9_1_0-release' tag doesn't correspond to
> the actual GCC 9.1 release. The GCC 9.1 release (as per 'gcc-9.1.0.tar'
> as well as 'svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/tags/gcc_9_1_0_release',
> r272156) would
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:18, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:13, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > We have found that the Git 'gcc-9_1_0-release' tag doesn't correspond to
> > the actual GCC 9.1 release. The GCC 9.1 release (as per 'gcc-9.1.0.tar'
> > as well as 's
Hi!
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:18:51 +0100, Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:13, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > We have found that the Git 'gcc-9_1_0-release' tag doesn't correspond to
> > the actual GCC 9.1 release. The GCC 9.1 release (as per 'gcc-9.1.0.tar'
> > as well as 'svn+ssh
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:29, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:18:51 +0100, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:13, Thomas Schwinge
> > wrote:
> > > We have found that the Git 'gcc-9_1_0-release' tag doesn't correspond to
> > > the actual GCC 9.1 rel
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:29, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:18:51 +0100, Jonathan Wakely
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:13, Thomas Schwinge
> > > wrote:
> > > > We have found that the Git
Hi!
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:35:40 +0100, Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:29, Thomas Schwinge
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:18:51 +0100, Jonathan Wakely
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:13, Tho
On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 at 09:24, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:35:40 +0100, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:29, Thomas Schwinge
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:18:51 +0100, J
Jonathan Wakely writes:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 at 09:24, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:35:40 +0100, Jonathan Wakely
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:33, Jonathan Wakely
>> > wrote:
>> > > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:29, Thomas Schwinge
>> > > wrote:
>>
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at 13:25, Vladislav Ivanishin wrote:
>
> Jonathan Wakely writes:
>
> > On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 at 09:24, Thomas Schwinge
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 16:35:40 +0100, Jonathan Wakely
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 16:33, Jonathan Wakely
>
On Jun 20 2019, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Other people have reported that their clones updated the tag without
> any problems, so the "would clobber existing tag" error I got might be
> because I've been creating and removing that tag locally.
You need to have a recent version of git to get that
11 matches
Mail list logo