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.