Re: Branch and tag deletions

Joseph Myers : > One more observation on that: in my last test conversion, deleting the > emptycommit-* tags took over 7 hours (i.e. the bulk of the time for the > conversion was spent just deleting those tags). Deleting tags matching > /-root$/ took about half an hour. So I think there is a p

Re: Branch and tag deletions

On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Joseph Myers : > > A further note: in a previous run of the conversion I didn't see any > > emptycommit-* tags. In my most recent conversion run, I see 4070 such > > tags. How do I tell reposurgeon never to create such tags? Or should I > > add a

Re: Branch and tag deletions

Joseph Myers : > > I'm more worried about missing files. I saw a bunch of those on my > > last test. This could be spurious - the elaborate set of branch > > mappings you specified confuses my validation test, because there is > > no longer a 1-1 corresponsence between Subversion and git branches.

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: How to test aarch64 when building a cross-compiler?

On Nov 27 2019, Andrew Dean via gcc wrote: > 2. export > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=${BuildRoot}/install/glibcs/aarch64-linux-gnu/lib64:${BuildRoot}/install/compilers/aarch64-linux-gnu/aarch64-glibc-linux-gnu/lib64 > > 3. sudo ln -s > ${BuildRoot}/install/glibcs/aarch64-linux-gnu/lib/ld-linux-aarch64.so.

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: How to test aarch64 when building a cross-compiler?

> On 11/25/19 2:43 PM, Andrew Dean via gcc wrote: > >> I get errors like this: > >> > >> aarch64-glibc-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: cannot read spec file > >> 'rdimon.specs': No such file or directory > >> > >> I can see that the rdimon.specs flag is added based on this lin

Re: Branch and tag deletions

On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Joseph Myers : > > My current test conversion run is testing two changes: deleting > > emptycommit tags, and using --user-ignores to prefer the .gitignore file > > in SVN over one auto-generated from svn:ignore properties. For the next > > one afte

Re: Branch and tag deletions

Joseph Myers : > My current test conversion run is testing two changes: deleting > emptycommit tags, and using --user-ignores to prefer the .gitignore file > in SVN over one auto-generated from svn:ignore properties. For the next > one after that I'll try eliminating all branch/tag removals tha

Re: Branch and tag deletions

On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > > Sure, we could do that. Eric, can you confirm that, with current > > reposurgeon, if a branch or tag was deleted in SVN and does not appear in > > the final revision of /branches or /tags, it should not appear in the > > resulting converted repos

Re: Branch and tag deletions

Joseph Myers : > On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > > > IMO, we should aim to convert complete SVN history frozen at a specific > > point. So that if we don't want to convert some of the branches or tags > > to git, then we should delete them from SVN repository before > > conversion

Re: Branch and tag deletions

On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > IMO, we should aim to convert complete SVN history frozen at a specific > point. So that if we don't want to convert some of the branches or tags > to git, then we should delete them from SVN repository before > conversion. Sure, we could do that.

Re: Branch and tag deletions

> On Nov 25, 2019, at 7:07 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > I'm looking at the sets of branches and tags resulting from a GCC > repository conversion with reposurgeon. > > 1. I see 227 branches (and one tag) with names like > cxx0x-concepts-branch-deleted-r131428-1 (this is out of 780 branches in

Re: PPC64 libmvec implementation of sincos

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 5:53 PM GT wrote: > > > > > > > i wonder if gcc can auto-vectorize scalar sincos > > > calls, the vectorizer seems to want the calls to > > > have no side-effect, but attribute pure or const > > > is not appropriate for sincos (which has no return > > > value but takes writ