[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 00:54:54 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Feature request
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 03:48:21AM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 29/10/13 03:33, Rich Felker wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 08:13:09PM +0000, Paul Schutte wrote:
> >> Hi Guys,
> >>
> >> Would it be possible for you to add the version of musl to the output of
> >> libc.so ?
> >>
> >> root@...otage:~# /lib/libc.so
> >> musl libc/dynamic program loader
> >> usage: /lib/libc.so pathname [args]
> >>
> >> I have several machines with musl on it and it will be very helpful to see
> >> which version is installed.
> >
> > Indeed, this has been something I've wanted to add for a while, and
> > which should definitely be in for 1.0. It's just a matter of doing the
> > right thing in the build and release system to get the version in
> > there, and it's not clear what the version should read for git builds
> > between versions. I think this is a good chance to discuss that.
>
> git describe short signature might be the best option.
Thanks for the git-fu help. I'm assuming you mean using something like
"git describe --tags"? Use of this could be contingent on either a
.git dir, or lack of a version file added to release tarballs. The
only thing that's not clear is how to handle non-release source trees
present on a build system that lacks a working git installation.
Rich
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.
