From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 08:13:39 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/4] package: remove 'v' prefix from tarball-fetched packages In-Reply-To: <3afd50b3-5cf1-d240-a7b9-f2f352411f70@mind.be> References: <20190612064209.23619-1-victor.huesca@bootlin.com> <20190612064209.23619-3-victor.huesca@bootlin.com> <3afd50b3-5cf1-d240-a7b9-f2f352411f70@mind.be> Message-ID: <20190620081339.48ebdbb5@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 23:06:22 +0200 Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > > -FLANNEL_VERSION = v0.5.5 > > +FLANNEL_VERSION = 0.5.5 > > FLANNEL_SITE = https://github.com/coreos/flannel/archive > > -FLANNEL_SOURCE = $(FLANNEL_VERSION).tar.gz > > +FLANNEL_SOURCE = v$(FLANNEL_VERSION).tar.gz > > > > FLANNEL_LICENSE = Apache-2.0 > > FLANNEL_LICENSE_FILES = LICENSE > > > > -FLANNEL_LDFLAGS = -X github.com/coreos/flannel/version.Version=$(FLANNEL_VERSION) > > +FLANNEL_LDFLAGS = -X github.com/coreos/flannel/version.Version=v$(FLANNEL_VERSION) > > I don't think this is really needed. Adam, do you think the v belongs in there > or not? BTW, if the v is removed, it should be noted in the commit log. Let's see Adam's answer, but what Victor did here is what preserves the existing behavior. > > -PRU_SOFTWARE_SUPPORT_VERSION = v5.1.0 > > -PRU_SOFTWARE_SUPPORT_SITE = https://git.ti.com/pru-software-support-package/pru-software-support-package/archive-tarball/$(PRU_SOFTWARE_SUPPORT_VERSION)? > > +PRU_SOFTWARE_SUPPORT_VERSION = 5.1.0 > > +PRU_SOFTWARE_SUPPORT_SITE = https://git.ti.com/pru-software-support-package/pru-software-support-package/archive-tarball/$(PRU_SOFTWARE_SUPPORT_VERSION) > > It might be just me, but this doesn't look correct... Definitely should be > explained in the commit message (and therefore, a separate patch). Indeed, this looks weird, a "v" should have been added before $(PRU_SOFTWARE_SUPPORT_VERSION) > Otherwise looks good to me. It would be nice to generally split it up into > patches that only contain changes that are really the same pattern. So e.g. the > spidev-test patch is a little different, so it should be a separate patch. > > Also, I wonder it it's a good idea to make this change for all packages. It > might be better to limit to packages that actually exist on > release-monitoring.org. Otherwise, it might happen that when it appears on > release-monitoring, some package *does* have a prefix, and that would be silly... Well, I think if a package on release-monitoring.org has a prefix, then it is its release-monitoring.org definition that is wrong and should be fixed. > Obviously, one way to make sure all of them are on release-monitoring is to add > the ones which are missing :-) Victor has already added on release-monitoring.org a number of our packages. But it's really a massive effort, and I don't think we can expect one single person to do it all, it will be a very gradual process. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com