On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 9:29 AM Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 09:06:01AM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 9:12 PM Serge Belyshev
> > <belys...@depni.sinp.msu.ru> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is to make development version string more readable, and
> > > to simplify navigation through gcc-testresults.
> > >
> > > Currently gcc_update uses git log --pretty=tformat:%p:%t:%H to
> > > generate version string, which is somewhat excessive since conversion
> > > to git because commit hashes are now stable.
> > >
> > > Even better, gcc-git-customization.sh script provides gcc-descr alias
> > > which makes prettier version string, and thus use it instead (or just
> > > abbreviated commit hash when the alias is not available).
> > >
> > > Before: [master revision
> > > b25edf6e6fe:e035f180ebf:7094a69bd62a14dfa311eaa2fea468f221c7c9f3]
> > > After: [master r12-2331]
> > >
> > > OK for mainline?
> >
> > Can you instead open-code gcc-descr in this script?
>
> Yeah, that will mean consistency no matter whether one has the
> customizations installed or not.
> And, you don't want the effect of $GCC_GIT gcc-descr but $GCC_GIT gcc-descr
> HEAD
> (the default is $GCC_GIT gcc-descr master).
> As you want to use gcc-descr without --full, I think
> revision=`$GCC_GIT log -n1 --pretty=tformat:%h`
> r=`$GCC_GIT describe --all --match 'basepoints/gcc-[0-9]*' HEAD \
> | sed -n
> 's,^\(tags/\)\?basepoints/gcc-\([0-9]\+\)-\([0-9]\+\)-g[0-9a-f]*$,r\2-\3,p;s,^\(tags/\)\?basepoints/gcc-\([0-9]\+\)$,r\2-0,p'`;
> if test -n $r; then
> o=`$GCC_GIT config --get gcc-config.upstream`;
> rr=`echo $r | sed -n
> 's,^r\([0-9]\+\)-[0-9]\+\(-g[0-9a-f]\+\)\?$,\1,p'`;
> if $GCC_GIT rev-parse --verify --quiet
> ${o:-origin}/releases/gcc-$rr >/dev/null; then
> m=releases/gcc-$rr;
> else
> m=master;
> fi;
> if $GCC_GIT merge-base --is-ancestor HEAD ${o:-origin}/$m;
> then
> revision=$r;
> fi
> fi
> will do it. Perhaps rename the r, o, rr and m temporaries.
Note the new form will be more difficult to use for people not having
the customizations
installed. It also will likely break when gcc-update is not invoked
on official branches?
So I'm not sure the change is a good one after all...
Richard.
> Jakub
>
