Re: Linux 2.6.32-rc3

Pavel Machek
2009-10-10T12:10:36Z

On Tue 2009-10-06 22:31:19, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 11:22:38AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >
> > Why don't you just have the kernel version Linux-commitid?
> >
> > why keep up the pretense that the 2.6.xx bit means anything outside of release?
> >
> > You could just have the tarball generation scripts make it into a 2.6.31 but
> > for everyone else we never see it.
>
> The tarball generation scripts for the daily snapshots already set
> EXTRAVERSION to -git15, -git16, etc.
>
> So the problem seems to be localized to those users/developers who are
> smart enough to use git, and dumb enough not to set
> CONFIG_LOCALVERSION_AUTO. So big of a set this actually is, I can't
> say. Do we have any statistics about how many bug reporters make this
> mistake?

I admit -- I did not know about LOCALVERSION_AUTO, and many times
wished -rc0 would be labeled as such.

Now...perhaps LOCALVERSION_AUTO should not be option? Just hardwire it
to Y? (But that still does not solve systems when someone, probably
me, did rm -rf .git, for space and speed reasons).

Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html