[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52707B35.2010402@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 04:21:25 +0100
From: Luca Barbato <lu_zero@...too.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Feature request
On 29/10/13 22:30, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 08:23:43PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
>> * Kurt H Maier <khm@...ops.net> [2013-10-29 18:53:38 +0000]:
>>> Quoting Andrew Bradford <andrew@...dfordembedded.com>:
>>>> How often is this a concern?
>>>> How are people obtaining non-release source trees not via an scm tool?
>>>>
>>>
>>> By pulling on one machine and copying it to various build hosts. The
>>> fewer build dependencies, the better.
>>>
>>
>> or building in a chroot
>> or in qemu from a v9fs mount
>> ...
>>
>> the build should not fail if git is unavailable
>
> Exactly.
>
>> otherwise the version string is not critical in that case
>> (if it's a make variable then it can be overridden from
>> config.mak or from the make cmdline anyway)
>
> It's not _critical_, but if it's horribly wrong, that defeats the
> purpose of being able to determine the version installed. Perhaps a
> good fallback approach would be:
Ideally you have:
- the major/minor version in an header (you can pull it a valid version
from there anytime no matter what)
- a git tag matching it
- a script to get easily how far we are from the tag
So if you checkout from git you have the full information, if you build
from a release you have the full information, if you are building from a
snapshot you have a partial but arguably valid information.
lu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
