Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Firmware versioning best practices II | From | Johannes Berg <> | Date | Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:00:39 +0100 |
| |
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 10:35 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> That doesn't prevent some people from using foo-$APIVER-$CODEVER if > they really have to, of course -- if they have firmware which can be > conditionally compiled for both old and new APIs, for example. But I > don't think it should be recommended.
That doesn't make much sense anyway. If the firmware filename is foo-$APIVER-$CODEVER every code change would need a corresponding driver change. If it is just foo-$APIVER then the $CODEVER can be embedded in the firmware file and printed so you know which code you're using, but if it doesn't influence the API I don't see why it should be part of the filename?
johannes [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |