On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 10:38 +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Nack.
The output of this patch isn't very clean. I think what we really want is just to have a configure flag --with-distro-version that will take an arbitrary string (provided by the packager) for what they'd like to see as output for the version.
So without --with-distro-version:
$> sssd --version 1.7.0
With ./configure --with-distro-version="-3.fc15" $> sssd --version 1.7.0-3.fc15
Or even ./configure --with-distro-version="-3.fc15\ Built: 2011-09-07"
Resulting in: $> sssd --version 1.7.0-3.fc15 Built: 2011-09-07"
If prerelease_version is specified in version.m4, (i.e. as ".rhbz12345") and with ./configure --with-distro-version="-3.fc15"
$> sssd --version 1.7.0-3.fc15.rhbz12345
(So prerelease version should always follow --with-distro-version)
Also, there is a line of whitespace in configure.ac. Please remove this.
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 10:38 +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Nack.
The output of this patch isn't very clean. I think what we really want is just to have a configure flag --with-distro-version that will take an arbitrary string (provided by the packager) for what they'd like to see as output for the version.
So without --with-distro-version:
$> sssd --version 1.7.0
With ./configure --with-distro-version="-3.fc15" $> sssd --version 1.7.0-3.fc15
What is the point of this? Hi, my name is rpm -qi sssd
Not a *bad* feature per-se, but kind of strange for the default. I do like the build in the --version output for when you are testing scratch builds or cherrypicking fixes from git and testing things.
On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 12:45 -0700, Jeff Schroeder wrote:
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 10:38 +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Nack.
The output of this patch isn't very clean. I think what we really want is just to have a configure flag --with-distro-version that will take an arbitrary string (provided by the packager) for what they'd like to see as output for the version.
So without --with-distro-version:
$> sssd --version 1.7.0
With ./configure --with-distro-version="-3.fc15" $> sssd --version 1.7.0-3.fc15
What is the point of this? Hi, my name is rpm -qi sssd
Not a *bad* feature per-se, but kind of strange for the default. I do like the build in the --version output for when you are testing scratch builds or cherrypicking fixes from git and testing things.
Well, it's primarily targeted at non-RPM distributions that can't do a simple 'rpm -q'. It also comes in handy for producing scratch builds (so you can mark a build as unofficial, for example).
Dne 8.9.2011 21:26, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
The output of this patch isn't very clean. I think what we really want is just to have a configure flag --with-distro-version that will take an arbitrary string (provided by the packager) for what they'd like to see as output for the version.
How about now?
On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 14:03 +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Dne 8.9.2011 21:26, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
The output of this patch isn't very clean. I think what we really want is just to have a configure flag --with-distro-version that will take an arbitrary string (provided by the packager) for what they'd like to see as output for the version.
How about now?
This doesn't work with multi-line version strings.
I'm also re-thinking our approach here. I'd like to open this up for discussion, but here are my new thoughts (sorry for going back and forth on this so many times).
For this to be particularly useful, especially to developers, we should probably make the DEFAULT version string be the base version plus a timestamp. We could then override this for genuine releases with a --with-release flag to configure. If no argument is provided, it would be just the base version. If an argument is offered, it would be concatenated to the base version.
So what we'd do instead is:
./configure (no args): <build> ./sssd --version sssd-1.7.0-pre201109201903Z
./configure --release <build> ./sssd --version sssd-1.7.0
./configure --release=-3.fc15 <build> ./sssd --version sssd-1.7.0-3.fc15
I think this would be helpful for those of us doing development like myself that regularly runs 'make install' from an in-progress tree.
I'm open to other suggestions, though.
On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 14:03 +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
Dne 8.9.2011 21:26, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
The output of this patch isn't very clean. I think what we really want is just to have a configure flag --with-distro-version that will take an arbitrary string (provided by the packager) for what they'd like to see as output for the version.
How about now?
This doesn't work with multi-line version strings.
I'm also re-thinking our approach here. I'd like to open this up for discussion, but here are my new thoughts (sorry for going back and forth on this so many times).
For this to be particularly useful, especially to developers, we should probably make the DEFAULT version string be the base version plus a timestamp. We could then override this for genuine releases with a --with-release flag to configure. If no argument is provided, it would be just the base version. If an argument is offered, it would be concatenated to the base version.
So what we'd do instead is:
./configure (no args):
<build> ./sssd --version sssd-1.7.0-pre201109201903Z
./configure --release
<build> ./sssd --version sssd-1.7.0
./configure --release=-3.fc15
<build> ./sssd --version sssd-1.7.0-3.fc15
I think this would be helpful for those of us doing development like myself that regularly runs 'make install' from an in-progress tree.
I'm open to other suggestions, though.
I don't quite understand. Could you please elaborate what's wrong with the original approach you suggested? That means one configure argument allowing to specify the version with a default version string if no such argument is provided.
Thanks Jan
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 08:40 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
I don't quite understand. Could you please elaborate what's wrong with the original approach you suggested? That means one configure argument allowing to specify the version with a default version string if no such argument is provided.
Well, for one thing what I asked for in the first place was impossible :-/
We can't have multi-line version strings in a configure option; autoconf can't handle it. (All that happens is that the config.h is broken)
So I was trying to think of an alternative that would serve our needs better. Though admittedly, at this point I'm starting to wonder at the usefulness of this feature at all.
So my new thought was that we should default to displaying a version that includes build-time information. Then if we wanted to display just an official version (or a distro-specific build) we could do so by using a --release argument.
This way at least, we would be able to identify work-in-progress builds easily as compared to official release builds.
Dne 21.9.2011 13:32, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 08:40 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
I don't quite understand. Could you please elaborate what's wrong with the original approach you suggested? That means one configure argument allowing to specify the version with a default version string if no such argument is provided.
Well, for one thing what I asked for in the first place was impossible :-/
We can't have multi-line version strings in a configure option; autoconf can't handle it. (All that happens is that the config.h is broken)
Actually, it can handle it. Although not directly (you have to put \n on the end of line):
$ ./configure --with-distro-version="-3.fc15\n\
Built: 2011-09-07" --enable-silent-rules
$ ./sssd --version 1.7.0-3.fc15 Built: 2011-09-07
So I was trying to think of an alternative that would serve our needs better. Though admittedly, at this point I'm starting to wonder at the usefulness of this feature at all.
So my new thought was that we should default to displaying a version that includes build-time information. Then if we wanted to display just an official version (or a distro-specific build) we could do so by using a --release argument.
This way at least, we would be able to identify work-in-progress builds easily as compared to official release builds.
Dne 21.9.2011 13:32, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 08:40 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
I don't quite understand. Could you please elaborate what's wrong with the original approach you suggested? That means one configure argument allowing to specify the version with a default version string if no such argument is provided.
Well, for one thing what I asked for in the first place was impossible :-/
We can't have multi-line version strings in a configure option; autoconf can't handle it. (All that happens is that the config.h is broken)
Actually, it can handle it. Although not directly (you have to put \n on the end of line):
$ ./configure --with-distro-version="-3.fc15\n\
Built: 2011-09-07" --enable-silent-rules
$ ./sssd --version 1.7.0-3.fc15 Built: 2011-09-07
I can confirm this works as described by Pavel.
So I was trying to think of an alternative that would serve our needs better. Though admittedly, at this point I'm starting to wonder at the usefulness of this feature at all.
So my new thought was that we should default to displaying a version that includes build-time information. Then if we wanted to display just an official version (or a distro-specific build) we could do so by using a --release argument.
This way at least, we would be able to identify work-in-progress builds easily as compared to official release builds.
I don't know if that will do any good. The only thing it will do is make it possible to distinguish between work-in-progress build and official release. This can be achieved by current patch as well, you can add a value to PRERELEASE_VERSION when releasing new tarball (of course, the semantic of the PRERELEASE_VERSION would be a bit different at that point). Due to this, I'd like to consider this patch ACKed.
Any other opinions?
Thanks Jan
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 05:31:26PM +0100, Jan Zelený wrote:
Dne 21.9.2011 13:32, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 08:40 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
I don't quite understand. Could you please elaborate what's wrong with the original approach you suggested? That means one configure argument allowing to specify the version with a default version string if no such argument is provided.
Well, for one thing what I asked for in the first place was impossible :-/
We can't have multi-line version strings in a configure option; autoconf can't handle it. (All that happens is that the config.h is broken)
Actually, it can handle it. Although not directly (you have to put \n on the end of line):
$ ./configure --with-distro-version="-3.fc15\n\
Built: 2011-09-07" --enable-silent-rules
$ ./sssd --version 1.7.0-3.fc15 Built: 2011-09-07
I can confirm this works as described by Pavel.
So I was trying to think of an alternative that would serve our needs better. Though admittedly, at this point I'm starting to wonder at the usefulness of this feature at all.
So my new thought was that we should default to displaying a version that includes build-time information. Then if we wanted to display just an official version (or a distro-specific build) we could do so by using a --release argument.
I still prefer --version over --release. It's the standard switch everyone uses.
This way at least, we would be able to identify work-in-progress builds easily as compared to official release builds.
I don't know if that will do any good. The only thing it will do is make it possible to distinguish between work-in-progress build and official release. This can be achieved by current patch as well, you can add a value to PRERELEASE_VERSION when releasing new tarball (of course, the semantic of the PRERELEASE_VERSION would be a bit different at that point). Due to this, I'd like to consider this patch ACKed.
Any other opinions?
I thought the real value was identifying distribution patchlevels easily?
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
-
Jakub Hrozek -
Jan Zelený -
Jeff Schroeder -
Pavel Březina -
Stephen Gallagher