master branch broken

[Brad Roberts]

On 3/23/14, 3:44 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 23 March 2014 21:58, Brad Roberts <braddr at puremagic.com> wrote:
>> I'm not at all concerned about space, and not sure why most developers would
>> be.  Assuming that the GDC changes were done on a non-master branch, and
>> that master reflects the GCC master, then seeing what the GDC changes are
>> would be a typical git operation: git diff master..GDC.
>>
>> But I can deal with a json config file if necessary.  Even better / easier,
>> would be a file with a single line that is the name of the file that should
>> exist, ie:
>>
>> -----
>> gcc-4.9-20131201.tar.bz2
>> -----
>>
>> I don't mind updating the tester as it stands today, but I kinda need to
>> _know_ it needs to be updated.  Waiting for things to fail, waiting for
>> someone to notice, and waiting for someone to diagnose it as being 'too old'
>> all sucks. :)
>>
>
> I'll try to remember to update the snapshot version each time I rebase
> my GCC sources.  ;)
>
>
>> If the GDC repo contained 3 branches, GDC-4.7, GDC-4.8, and GDC-4.9, having
>> the auto-tester work on them would be _trivial_.  I could enable that right
>> now.  It takes less than 5 minutes to do for new DMD branches.
>>
>>
>
> https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/branches
>
> master is synonymous with GDC-4.9

I was referring back to having the repository be complete, not just the delta on top of gcc.  As 
deltas it's no longer a "checkout and build" process.  Not hard steps, to be sure, but more steps 
that are gdc build process specific.