Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:09:12 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Fix empty version number when building outside of a git repo | From | John Garry <> |
| |
On 28/09/2022 18:26, Will Chandler wrote: > On 28 Sep 2022, at 5:21, John Garry wrote: > >> This looks ok. But did you consider going back to same flow as pre-7572733b8499 to avoid a Makefile check, like: >> >> ---8<---- >> >> CID= >> TAG= >> if test -d ../../.git -o -f ../../.git >> then >> TAG=$(MAKEFLAGS= make -sC ../.. kernelversion) >> CID=$(git log -1 --abbrev=12 --pretty=format:"%h" 2>/dev/null) && CID="-g$CID" >> elif test -f ../../PERF-VERSION-FILE >> then >> TAG=$(cut -d' ' -f3 ../../PERF-VERSION-FILE | sed -e 's/\"//g') >> fi >> if test -z "$TAG" >> then >> TAG=$(MAKEFLAGS= make -sC ../.. kernelversion) >> fi >> >> --->8--- >> >> The evaluation for $TAG is not really needed in the first leg since the fallback does the same thing, but just added for clarity. > > I think that would be fine as well. I don't have a strong opinion on which one > is easier to follow. > > Looking at this more closely, there is a slight difference between the two > approaches. In the problem scenario my patch will always use `make kernelversion`, > while pre-7572733b8499 starts with PERF-VERSION-FILE if available, falling > back to the Makefile. > > With the old approach PERF-VERSION-FILE could be used to manually > override the version, but this is inconsistent with how the version is > generated when building in a git repo. Is this relevant?
Hmmm... maybe someone would want to customise PERF-VERSION-FILE for their own distro. Not sure. But then fiddling with PERF-VERSION-FILE might break the parsing so...I guess not.
BTW, is there any other method of building the perf code not considered? So far I know: a. in git tree b. perf-tar-src-pkg c. tarball
Thanks, John
| |