Hi, > > Hmm, just noticed that only git builds are considered being "clean". > > That implies builds from release tarballs will *not* be considered > > clean. Was that intentional? > > My thinking was that it is too easy for a ".version" file to be > inadvertently incorrect. That is, if one pulls down a release tarball > and then modifies some files, the version in the binary is not going > to reflect the fact that changes were made. > > I didn't think it would be too painful to require the git repo for > those desiring a reproducible build. The "git describe" tool is quite > useful for getting a meaningful hash of the repo. > > Do you think that will be a problem?
Linux distro builds usually use release tarballs (plus possibly patches) not git checkouts. Having timestamp and hostname back in the version string then is a step backwards. Will have only the effect that distros start patching the build system again ... One option I see is to consider builds clean in case EXTRAVERSION is present, so distros can simply set EXTRAVERSION to the rpm release. Or add a new variable specifically for package build versioning, and possibly even set that automatically. rpm sets some environment variables in the build environment .... cheers, Gerd _______________________________________________ SeaBIOS mailing list SeaBIOS@seabios.org http://www.seabios.org/mailman/listinfo/seabios
