Re: [PATCH] Add sequence number to 'xm info'

[Dan Smith <danms@us.ibm.com>]

IP> I guess for trees that are direct clones of xenbits with no local
IP> modifications then the short id is meaningful. Such trees are
IP> probably in the majority.  

Indeed.  Additionally, people who are testing xen on all of their
systems will most likely be doing so with a real clone of the repo,
and not one with a bunch of random patches, I would think.

IP> I guess it doesn't really hurt providing people know what they're
IP> doing.

I think the people who don't know what they're doing won't know that
it's not part of the larger changeset ID, which means they'll copy the
whole thing when posting a bug, which gets the info there anyway.

Would it be better to tuck the sequence number away somewhere else?  I
think that would be a bit overkill, but if anyone has strong feelings
about it, I can do it.  Perhaps adding "xen_build" to "xen_major" and
"xen_minor"?

-- 
Dan Smith
IBM Linux Technology Center
Open Hypervisor Team
email: danms@us.ibm.com