From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 23:05:17 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCHv2] docs/manual: using a branch name as FOO_VERSION does not work In-Reply-To: <20180511155058.26875-1-yann.morin.1998@free.fr> References: <20180511155058.26875-1-yann.morin.1998@free.fr> Message-ID: <20180511230517.08f676bc@windsurf.home> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Fri, 11 May 2018 17:50:58 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > For various reasons, we've always suggested users to avoid using a > branch as version string for their packages, because it does not work > as a they would expect: > > - it is not reproducible, because the branch may change between two > builds that are done at different times; > > - it does not even follow the branch, as Buildroot anyway generates > a local tarball, which it will reuse on subsequent builds. > Furthermore, since we fetch and not pull, any existing local branch > is not updated. > > Yet, until recently, using a branch name would just work (with the > above limitations): the git tree was cloned, the branch checked out, > and the tarball created. > > But with the advent of the git caching, using a branch name does not > work anymore. Indeed, we now do a git-fetch, and that does not create > local master branch. So we can't check out master, because it does not > exist locally. And for other branches, as noticed above, the local > branch does not get udpated to the remote one. > > Furthermore, the local branches are only created by chance, again as a > side-effect of trying to fetch the "special refs". > > So, we can't say that we reliably support the use of a branch name. > > Update the manual to state that using a branch does not work. Remove > the 'stable' example, as it looked like the name of a stable branch; > instead, replace it with a version string that ressemble a tag. > > Fix the layout of the manual by making the version examples an actual > bulleted list. > > Note: the above is only entirely true for git. For Mercurial, CVS and > subversion, the status may be mixed, but nonetheless, using branches is > still a bad idea, if at least because it is not reproducible, and > because Buildroot does not even follow the branch. So, we do not > differentiate between the various SCMs, and just flatly state that using > a branch name is not supported. > > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" > Cc: Thomas De Schampheleire > Cc: Thomas Petazzoni > Cc: Maxime Hadjinlian > Cc: Peter Korsgaard > > --- > Changes v1 -> v2: > - enhance commit log with additional details (Ricardo) > - blurb about > - typoes in commit log (Ricardo) > --- > docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt | 12 ++++++------ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) Applied to master after using "version control system", as suggested by Thomas DS. Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com