From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com (e4.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.144]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e4.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65FD9DDEC4 for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:38:12 +1000 (EST) Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e4.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7A1c6Jk025160 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:38:06 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.4) with ESMTP id l7A1c6Fw532124 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:38:06 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l7A1c50Q028054 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:38:06 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 20:37:54 -0500 From: Josh Boyer To: David Gibson Subject: Re: DTC 1.0.0 Release Coming? Message-ID: <20070809203754.2e9192c5@zod.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20070810013001.GF17370@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070726030550.GA1149@localhost.localdomain> <20070726142739.GB18684@localhost.localdomain> <20070727013331.GB1561@localhost.localdomain> <20070806084813.5432ba91@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <20070810013001.GF17370@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Jon Loeliger List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:30:01 +1000 David Gibson wrote: > > Except didn't you say you were going to work with Stephen to get DTC > > into the kernel source itself? Keeping things similar to Kbuild might > > help in that effort. > > Actually, after discussions with Stephen and Paulus, we decided not to > take this route. In any case having Kbuild like versioning wouldn't > actually help us any in integrating into a full Kbuild system. Can you elaborate why you decided not to? I'm just curious. > > > Have a look at the patch I posted. I haven't sufficiently tested it > > > yet, but it should be able to generated version info for a tarball too > > > (provided the .git-manifest file is included, and I'm intending that > > > will be build by a make dist target). It will give both the > > > git-derived based version, and a file content derived hash so we can > > > robustly tell different builds apart, all with less code than the > > > current system. > > > > That may be. But I don't see the current approach being too much of a > > problem either. Especially given that it's already there and it > > works. Oh, and you sent out your patch saying it wasn't ready for > > merge and with no sign off. Small but important issues to fix I'd > > think. > > Yeah, it lacks a make dist target, and needs a bit more work to > support that properly. Never mind, I'll revisit this post the 1.0 > release. Ok. josh