Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

[Pavel Roskin]

Hello!

I'm trying to keep some external drivers up to date with the kernel, and
the first two weeks after the release is the worst time for me.  There
is no way to distinguish the current git kernel from the latest release.
It's only after rc1 is released that I can use preprocessor to check
LINUX_VERSION_CODE.

Before that, I have to rely on tricks or change the kernel version
myself in a separate patch and tell other team members to do the same.

Basically, I only care about kernel releases, but I also want to
increase the probability that the next standalone release of my drivers
will work with the next release on the kernel.  That's why I check
compatibility with the tip of the linux-2.6 repository.

Calling git version of Linux "2.6.23" one day before 2.6.24-rc1 is
preposterous, as it's likely to be compatible with 2.6.24, not 2.6.23.
Calling git version of Linux "2.6.24-pre" or something next day after
2.6.23 release is OK in comparison, since nobody developing external
drivers cares about old revisions of the kernel.  And the developers of
the kernel itself shouldn't care about versions at all.

It would be nice to establish a rule to increment the version number
immediately after the kernel release and have a suffix to indicate that
it's a pre-rc version.  "rc0" is my personal favorite.

It would also be helpful for other repositories, as it would indicate
whether any post-release changes have been merged in.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin

Re: Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

[Dave Jones]

On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:22:43PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:

 > It would be nice to establish a rule to increment the version number
 > immediately after the kernel release and have a suffix to indicate that
 > it's a pre-rc version.  "rc0" is my personal favorite.

fwiw, rc0 is also what the Fedora kernel uses for versioning when we're
shipping pre-rc1 kernels.

	Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

[Pavel Roskin]

On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 22:34 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:22:43PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> 
>  > It would be nice to establish a rule to increment the version number
>  > immediately after the kernel release and have a suffix to indicate that
>  > it's a pre-rc version.  "rc0" is my personal favorite.
> 
> fwiw, rc0 is also what the Fedora kernel uses for versioning when we're
> shipping pre-rc1 kernels.

Thanks!  I didn't think of the possibility of anyone distributing
precompiled kernels from the "pre-rc" window, but if Fedora does it
(hopefully for beta-testers only), it should be absolutely clear that
it's not just a release with some minor fixes.

Anyone adjusting any software for that kernel would be adjusting for the
next kernel release.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin

Re: Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

[Dave Jones]

On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:45:17PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
 > 
 > On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 22:34 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
 > > On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:22:43PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
 > > 
 > >  > It would be nice to establish a rule to increment the version number
 > >  > immediately after the kernel release and have a suffix to indicate that
 > >  > it's a pre-rc version.  "rc0" is my personal favorite.
 > > 
 > > fwiw, rc0 is also what the Fedora kernel uses for versioning when we're
 > > shipping pre-rc1 kernels.
 > 
 > Thanks!  I didn't think of the possibility of anyone distributing
 > precompiled kernels from the "pre-rc" window, but if Fedora does it
 > (hopefully for beta-testers only), it should be absolutely clear that
 > it's not just a release with some minor fixes.

yeah, this is just in our 'development' pool (also known as 'rawhide')
Proper releases only ever get full point releases + -stable as updates.

	Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

[Rik van Riel]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:22:43 -0400
Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> wrote:

> I'm trying to keep some external drivers up to date with the kernel,
> and the first two weeks after the release is the worst time for me.

Consider this an incentive to submit your code for inclusion
in the upstream kernel.  Having all the common drivers integrated
in the mainline kernel makes it much easier for users to use all
their hardware, external drivers are not just a pain for the developers.

-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan

Re: Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

[Pavel Roskin]

On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 22:41 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:22:43 -0400
> Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> > I'm trying to keep some external drivers up to date with the kernel,
> > and the first two weeks after the release is the worst time for me.
> 
> Consider this an incentive to submit your code for inclusion
> in the upstream kernel.  Having all the common drivers integrated
> in the mainline kernel makes it much easier for users to use all
> their hardware, external drivers are not just a pain for the developers.

The incentive has already worked for MadWifi, which has landed in the
wireless-2.6 repository under the name "ath5k".  Still, there is a lot
of work to do, and some features won't appear in the kernel driver soon,
partly because they rely on the chipset features that still need to be
reverse engineered.

In the meantime, somebody has to maintain the old madwifi and release
fixed for security and kernel compatibility.

Also, there are drivers that are just to unwieldy to be shaped into
something resembling a typical Linux driver.  linux-wlan-ng is such
project.  No matter what the incentive, it won't go to the kernel.
Maybe somebody will write a clean driver for Prism USB devices one day,
but it didn't happen so far.

Finally, there is a little at76_usb driver, which supports quite old
802.11b devices.  It's in wireless-2.6 as well, but I simply cannot
expect users to test it from there.  And if I make a standalone release,
I'd rather not make another one when 2.6.24 comes out.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin

Re: Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

[Frans Pop]

Pavel Roskin wrote:
> I'm trying to keep some external drivers up to date with the kernel, and
> the first two weeks after the release is the worst time for me.  There
> is no way to distinguish the current git kernel from the latest release.
> It's only after rc1 is released that I can use preprocessor to check
> LINUX_VERSION_CODE.
> 
> Before that, I have to rely on tricks or change the kernel version
> myself in a separate patch and tell other team members to do the same.
 
Note that you can see if there have been commits since a release (the last git tag) by using the command 'git describe'.

$ git checkout -b temp v2.6.23
Switched to a new branch "temp"
$ git describe
v2.6.23
$ git checkout master
$ git describe
v2.6.23-4223-g65a6ec0

Format is: last tag - # commits since last tag - id of HEAD commit

Hope this helps,
Frans Pop

Re: Distinguishing releases from pre-rc snapshots

[Pavel Roskin]

Quoting Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>:

> Note that you can see if there have been commits since a release   
> (the last git tag) by using the command 'git describe'.
>
> $ git checkout -b temp v2.6.23
> Switched to a new branch "temp"
> $ git describe
> v2.6.23
> $ git checkout master
> $ git describe
> v2.6.23-4223-g65a6ec0
>
> Format is: last tag - # commits since last tag - id of HEAD commit

I don't see how I can use it in preprocessor conditions.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin