[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Stable release.

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Stable release.
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:50:17 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux)

"Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:

> From: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
> To: <address@hidden>
>> Ok, now I am amused.  make test of the unmodified 2.14 release branch in
>> a fresh directory yields
>> Processing `./01/'
>> Parsing...
>> Renaming input to: `'
>> error: program too old: 2.14.2 (file requires: 2.14.3)
>> Interpreting music...
>> Preprocessing graphical objects...
>> Calculating line breaks...
>> Drawing systems...
>> Writing header field `texidoc' to `./01/lily-a2a4d578.texidoc'...
>> Writing ./01/lily-a2a4d578-1.signature
>> Layout output to `./01/lily-a2a4d578.eps'...
>> Layout output to `./01/lily-a2a4d578-1.eps'...
>> Writing ./01/lily-a2a4d578-systems.texi...
>> Writing ./01/lily-a2a4d578-systems.tex...
>> Writing ./01/lily-a2a4d578-systems.count...
>> Writing timing to 01/lily-a2a4d578.profile...
>> The following commit _not_ contained in 2.14.2 is responsible for that:
>> commit c20806e357fbadeaa77ae8c51e5282cc2b6aec4a (HEAD, origin/2.14, 2.14)
>> Author: Reinhold Kainhofer <address@hidden>
>> Date:   Sat Jul 2 13:14:34 2011 +0200
>>    Fix Issue 770: Lyrics attached to a voice-derived context are off by 1
>> Now this patch has never been distributed as part of a release.  It was
>> apparently intended as a backport.  I am tempted removing it.
> As far as I can see it's in 2.15 - both changed files are certainly
> there on my repo.  It looks like the error is simply in a version
> statement in - 'error: program too old:
> 2.14.2 (file requires: 2.14.3)'.  You'll need to bump the version
> anyway - 2.14.3 is a possible.  Have you tried bumping it and
> recompiling?

Sure, and as far as I can tell, it does the trick.  But that's not
really the question.  It is probably a historic accident that this
backport has never been released as part of 2.14.  So it would feel out
of place to include it in a stop-gap let's fix compiler-problems stable

On current Ubuntu 12.04, 2.14.2 seems to compile and pass regtests.
That's actually better than I had assumed.  I _think_ that 12.10 will
have Pavel's compiler fix for gcc 4.7.0 in it, and the same is likely
the case for current Fedora.

GCC 4.7.1 has been released on June 14th, GCC 4.6.3 on March 1st.
Either will do fine.  The C++ language problem I remembered would occur
just with 2.12.

So after reevaluating the situation and some actual tests, I make a
total turnaround and propose that it seems reasonable to me to leave
2.14 alone.  Half a year ago, this would have been different, but it
looks like I missed the proper time to panic about this.

Sorry for the helter-skelter.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]