RFC: busybox 1.2.3?

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 05:11:04PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
>On Thursday 14 December 2006 3:25 am, Bernhard Fischer wrote:

>> Some notes concerning the release branch:
>> 1) please don't forget to do a
>> svn cp ../trunk/busybox .../branches/busybox-1_3-stable
>> This should be done for any release.
>
>I never did this.  Bernhard's been agitating for this forever.  Keeping two 
>forks in sync is an insane pain, I just backported svn commits from the 
>development version.  (If it wasn't fixed in -devel, it obviously wasn't that 
>important.)
>
>Personally, I think if he wants his branch, he should maintain it, but it's up 
>to you what you do.

It's not about a branch for me. If i need one then i create one on my
own.

It's for allowing other developers to apply fixes to the stable branch.
Doing this is usually the duty of the person responsible for creating
the release in about any project i saw.

>> 3) Please do not forget to remove the -Werror from Makefile.flags for
>> the stable series. It may be nice to have for development, but breaking
>> to build for users because of it sounds like it will trigger
>> complaints..
>
>I don't care about complaints, but gcc 4.1.x is broken.  It produces warnings 
>about "possible use before initialization" of things that provably _aren't_.

The very same version that you personally use can produce warnings if it
is used on a different arch. Whether a particular version of gcc is
broken for you doesn't really matter when it comes to shipping a release
that is ment to be compilable without too much trouble and irritation
for users.