Thomas Anders wrote:
> Dave Shield wrote:
>
>> But I remain unconvinced that it's necessary for
>> the version string to include a timestamp at all.
>
>
> I do see some benefits of a timestamp, e.g. when dealing
> with reports (either on this list or SF) referencing
> the behaviour of CVS versions. If there have been (and
> still are) recent changes regarding this behaviour, a plain
> x.y.z+CVS may not be enough to tell whether this version
> has been pulled (co) before or after a certain CVS commit.
>
>
> +Thomas
>
Dave's examples did not include one for the HEAD CVS branch.
Niels, Did you just write that you build the date and branch
into one of the sources, at build time ?
Personally, I think that would be best to use, since it
represents the least work for the -coders %^)
There are RCS Id strings in the binary that can give you a
pretty good idea of the age of the sources which were used.
# ident /usr/local/sbin/snmpd
/usr/local/sbin/snmpd:
$Date: 2004/01/27 17:24:26 $
$Id: versioninfo.c,v 5.2 2004/01/27 17:24:26 slif Exp $
Perhaps a simple way to add the contents of "CVS/Tag" to the
$Id line of some source file would make some of us happy-er ?
[NOTE: there is no "CVS/Tag" file for the HEAD branch]
-Mike
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
