Re: [PATCH bpf-next] scripts/bpf: Fix attributes for bpf-helpers(7) man page

[Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1622 bytes --]

Hi Quentin,

On 8/23/22 17:18, Quentin Monnet wrote:
>> The versioning should always be correct.  git-describe(1) should be
>> preferred, or in absence of that, a generic (unreleased) string should
>> be used.  Describing any commit after v5.18 and before v5.19-rc1 to be
>> '5.18.0' is plain wrong/misleading.  The Makefile should probably
>> autogenerate that info from git-describe(1).  See how the Linux
>> man-pages do it (in the links above you can see it) for example.
> 
> It's not really about how to do it, more that I don't want to have a
> hard dependency on git for the script. I want it to run just as well
> when there's no Git repo around. But I can try to run "git describe" and
> fall back on the Makefile (or on an empty version) if the command fails.

Yeah, I didn't mean it's a bug in the script, but seems to me like a bug 
in the kernel Makefile.  If git fails because it's not present, there 
could be a fallback like "unknown-version".  In the man-pages, when I 
prepare the tarball, with `make dist`, I hardcode the version in the 
pages.  Maybe the kernel Makefile should have unreleased as the version 
in the git repo, and when a tarball is generated the Makefile should 
replace that unreleased version by the appropriate git version.  Since 
git will not be found in the tarballs, that version will be used in that 
case.  But when running from git, git-describe(1) should be preferred.

> 
> OK I'll prepare a new version, thanks for your help.

It's a pleasure!

Cheers,

Alex

> Quentin

-- 
Alejandro Colomar
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]