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.