public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] Makefile: remove BUILD_TAG from KBUILD_CFLAGS
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 12:01:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160209170130.GL11375@bill-the-cat> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56BA0FA3.6070503@gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 08:11:15AM -0800, James Chargin wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/08/2016 05:32 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >From: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
> >
> >If BUILD_TAG is part of KBUILD_CFLAGS, then any time the value changes,
> >all files get rebuilt. In a continuous integration environment, the value
> >will change every build. This wastes time assuming that incremental
> >builds would otherwise occur.
> >
> >To solve this, remove BUILD_TAG from KBUILD_FLAGS and add it to the end of
> >"local version".
> >
> >This has other advantages too:
> >- The special case for BUILD_TAG in display_options.c can be removed.
> >- The version printed by the "version" command exactly matches what is
> >   printed at boot.
> >
> >Old sign-on message:
> >U-Boot 2016.03-rc1-00044-g4085db5e767b (Feb ...), Build: bar-bas
> >
> >New sign-on message:
> >U-Boot 2016.03-rc1-00044-g4085db5e767b-bar-baz (Feb ...)
> 
> I would urge this not be done. The display of the BUILD_TAG on
> startup is pretty useful in my environment. It's been there for a
> long time and some of my users have grown used to it.
> 
> Of all the parts of the sign-on message, I'd rather the git hash go
> away than the BUILD_TAG. None of my users really care about the
> level of detail of the git hash and won't spend the time required to
> use this hash to determine if they have the version they want. (Some
> don't have a repo clone, and don't care to, and so can't easily make
> the correspondence even if they wanted to).

Yeah, I think this is too widely used of a thing to change.  FWIW, I
really like githashes since it means you can see if $random-binary is
something you have in $vendor-tree or not.  So I think in this case, NAK
on the patch and maybe need to poke Travis-CI on how to or not to tag
things?

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20160209/c1663dca/attachment.sig>

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-09 17:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-09  1:32 [U-Boot] [PATCH] Makefile: remove BUILD_TAG from KBUILD_CFLAGS Stephen Warren
2016-02-09 16:11 ` James Chargin
2016-02-09 17:01   ` Tom Rini [this message]
2016-02-09 17:26     ` Stephen Warren
2016-02-09 17:43       ` [U-Boot] [PATCH] Makefile: remove BUILD_TAG from KBUILD_CFLAGSilver pepper blue dog Tom Rini
2016-02-09 17:53         ` Stephen Warren
2016-02-09 18:18           ` [U-Boot] [PATCH] Makefile: remove BUILD_TAG from KBUILD_CFLAGS Tom Rini
2016-02-10  5:58             ` Masahiro Yamada
2016-02-10 16:49               ` Stephen Warren

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160209170130.GL11375@bill-the-cat \
    --to=trini@konsulko.com \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox