From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88CE115ECC2 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 16:21:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721838097; cv=none; b=lw++jkoZvhGDrJwdXJ2NSWYe2vfSlHDcuk+xC6vAjj87LPdBgmbhbrW9cmuQU05g0uWc7ZcZ0DKTqKO2aRZz+OwfLGcE41fZcW5N8R4wYnOmg+XFhbqiutqXS/t82DloQl9/KAssrCp7j0846KnVQaeUT9UNDvbO6+o8ErvLdxI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721838097; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oBKtuTBcMuZTEr2sJ9thXjEsrmW9nfQ3cOZv1CDCfOQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=T0PdybzHu4N2744ukcBTOs/IN8ZIc3Gtg5JbQMJ7La8yAngLKoaGD4VY/9WKaFZBhMVOrUiwMavEbB02NzIVzC8TxDhxV1H1zDesFjXmUfpGi7Ua73v07f4SxvYYue5G1BNxuVfJ5fHj9cCI6LrjSU+/CSU42B5IWODsnNxO8+s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=t7lBkTgV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="t7lBkTgV" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A14218F82; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 12:21:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=oBKtuTBcMuZTEr2sJ9thXjEsrmW9nfQ3cOZv1C DCfOQ=; b=t7lBkTgVHjQjd+0xpT9Wl8pgrfRM/crYvrZuycJ6n947AGLgItBoHu ne3VUZ7A5dSy3bJZB/SPJubRAUNMVeCRUL5TF+SeCN8he6JBcLvM3jeCAPYQslRV 7U0oFdfPOKBICcBGAnFO8JXq3znivyZKzywYtRHVb5VGmyhxLEZr0= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A6C18F81; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 12:21:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.139.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C76E718F80; Wed, 24 Jul 2024 12:21:34 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Randall Becker Cc: Johannes Schindelin , "Randall S. Becker" , "git@vger.kernel.org" , "Randall S . Becker" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Teach git version --build-options about zlib versions. In-Reply-To: (Randall Becker's message of "Wed, 24 Jul 2024 13:36:03 +0000") References: <20240621180947.64419-1-randall.becker@nexbridge.ca> <20240621180947.64419-3-randall.becker@nexbridge.ca> <80112f79-f2ec-28ff-3ced-9df9d7ea87f0@gmx.de> <0bec87dc-d852-4133-1e6d-11e9a1c5df2c@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 09:21:33 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: CB89D030-49D8-11EF-BAC0-34EEED2EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Randall Becker writes: > What I actually proposed was splitting --build-options with > runtime (some representative argument). This would allow the > headers used at build time (--build-options) to be reported *and* > the runtime (probably) DLL versions (but would also report static > linked library versions) to be reported. Both are useful from a > support standpoint. That certainly is a reasonable future plan. > However, the --build-options argument was > intended to report an invariant set of values used during the > build, so I would rather not conflate the two distinctly different > semantic values. This reasoning makes sense to me, too. Please wrap overly long lines to reasonable width, by the way.