[PATCH] add-build-git-head-info.patch

Andy Green andy at openmoko.com
Sun Jul 27 20:19:58 CEST 2008


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Somebody in the thread at some point said:

| It's just painful when extra and local version info gets involved, users
| get angry because they need to install modules all the time and things
| get screwed up when they forget; developers get angry because they need
| to install them but know darned well that the bump in version number was
| insignificant and thus dealing with modules is wasted effort for them,
| then somebody gets rid of a whole lot of modules to solve the problem
| with a monolithic kernel, which usually annoys someone else who insists
| that for some important reason a module-ized kernel is critical to them,
| and then somewhere somebody gets all irate because they have an
| out-of-tree kernel module they've built and they can't keep up because
| the kernel versioning changes with every nightly build...
|
| FWIW, I build and test with a monolithic kernel, so it matters not to me
| personally.  But the distros have many modules, and at least some of
| them are modules for important reasons.  So adding extra or local
| version to the standard distro would have far-reaching effects on the
feeds.

Well, I don't think the packages use the build script... somebody did
suggest this last week on community list that we should be able to
determine the patchlevel of the kernel from runtime they wanted to know
what GPS fixes they had in), I think it's good.  But, I don't control
the packaging action at all so when they mentioned it I didn't have a
way forward.

When you mentioned it a second time I thought I would implement it and
it can encourage the packaging folks to use the script parts since they
work.

So the fact is I only have control over my build script, I will butt of
out of any decision about the packaging side doing it.  Fact is either
way they do it, it'll be nice to be able to trace bug reports to a tree
and patchlevel.  Since I don't issue kernel binaries at the moment it
doesn't make much odds what I use.

- -Andy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkiMvE4ACgkQOjLpvpq7dMq6JQCePGm272cuhYOffkQwTpBd4PFM
YegAn03R63kG1kgvyW4N9JLSVgPptyS0
=l5i5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




More information about the openmoko-kernel mailing list