Message ID | 20180511155058.26875-1-yann.morin.1998@free.fr |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Headers | show |
Series | [PATCHv2] docs/manual: using a branch name as FOO_VERSION does not work | expand |
2018-05-11 17:50 GMT+02:00 Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>: > For various reasons, we've always suggested users to avoid using a > branch as version string for their packages, because it does not work > as a they would expect: > > - it is not reproducible, because the branch may change between two > builds that are done at different times; > > - it does not even follow the branch, as Buildroot anyway generates > a local tarball, which it will reuse on subsequent builds. > Furthermore, since we fetch and not pull, any existing local branch > is not updated. > > Yet, until recently, using a branch name would just work (with the > above limitations): the git tree was cloned, the branch checked out, > and the tarball created. > > But with the advent of the git caching, using a branch name does not > work anymore. Indeed, we now do a git-fetch, and that does not create > local master branch. So we can't check out master, because it does not > exist locally. And for other branches, as noticed above, the local > branch does not get udpated to the remote one. > > Furthermore, the local branches are only created by chance, again as a > side-effect of trying to fetch the "special refs". > > So, we can't say that we reliably support the use of a branch name. > > Update the manual to state that using a branch does not work. Remove > the 'stable' example, as it looked like the name of a stable branch; > instead, replace it with a version string that ressemble a tag. > > Fix the layout of the manual by making the version examples an actual > bulleted list. > > Note: the above is only entirely true for git. For Mercurial, CVS and > subversion, the status may be mixed, but nonetheless, using branches is > still a bad idea, if at least because it is not reproducible, and > because Buildroot does not even follow the branch. So, we do not > differentiate between the various SCMs, and just flatly state that using > a branch name is not supported. > > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> > Cc: Thomas De Schampheleire <patrickdepinguin@gmail.com> > Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> > Cc: Maxime Hadjinlian <maxime.hadjinlian@gmail.com> > Cc: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com> > > --- > Changes v1 -> v2: > - enhance commit log with additional details (Ricardo) > - blurb about > - typoes in commit log (Ricardo) > --- > docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt | 12 ++++++------ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt b/docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt > index 7e1f246752..8ea8ce6037 100644 > --- a/docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt > +++ b/docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt > @@ -199,12 +199,12 @@ information is (assuming the package name is +libfoo+) : > * +LIBFOO_VERSION+, mandatory, must contain the version of the > package. Note that if +HOST_LIBFOO_VERSION+ doesn't exist, it is > assumed to be the same as +LIBFOO_VERSION+. It can also be a > - revision number, branch or tag for packages that are fetched > - directly from their revision control system. + > - Examples: + > - +LIBFOO_VERSION = 0.1.2+ + > - +LIBFOO_VERSION = cb9d6aa9429e838f0e54faa3d455bcbab5eef057+ + > - +LIBFOO_VERSION = stable+ > + revision number or a tag for packages that are fetched directly > + from their revision control system. Do not use a branch name as I noticed this is the only place where we say 'revision control system', other places use 'version control system' which is in line with the acronym VCS. I suggest to change this at the same time. Best regards, Thomas
Hello, On Fri, 11 May 2018 17:50:58 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > For various reasons, we've always suggested users to avoid using a > branch as version string for their packages, because it does not work > as a they would expect: > > - it is not reproducible, because the branch may change between two > builds that are done at different times; > > - it does not even follow the branch, as Buildroot anyway generates > a local tarball, which it will reuse on subsequent builds. > Furthermore, since we fetch and not pull, any existing local branch > is not updated. > > Yet, until recently, using a branch name would just work (with the > above limitations): the git tree was cloned, the branch checked out, > and the tarball created. > > But with the advent of the git caching, using a branch name does not > work anymore. Indeed, we now do a git-fetch, and that does not create > local master branch. So we can't check out master, because it does not > exist locally. And for other branches, as noticed above, the local > branch does not get udpated to the remote one. > > Furthermore, the local branches are only created by chance, again as a > side-effect of trying to fetch the "special refs". > > So, we can't say that we reliably support the use of a branch name. > > Update the manual to state that using a branch does not work. Remove > the 'stable' example, as it looked like the name of a stable branch; > instead, replace it with a version string that ressemble a tag. > > Fix the layout of the manual by making the version examples an actual > bulleted list. > > Note: the above is only entirely true for git. For Mercurial, CVS and > subversion, the status may be mixed, but nonetheless, using branches is > still a bad idea, if at least because it is not reproducible, and > because Buildroot does not even follow the branch. So, we do not > differentiate between the various SCMs, and just flatly state that using > a branch name is not supported. > > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> > Cc: Thomas De Schampheleire <patrickdepinguin@gmail.com> > Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> > Cc: Maxime Hadjinlian <maxime.hadjinlian@gmail.com> > Cc: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com> > > --- > Changes v1 -> v2: > - enhance commit log with additional details (Ricardo) > - blurb about > - typoes in commit log (Ricardo) > --- > docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt | 12 ++++++------ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) Applied to master after using "version control system", as suggested by Thomas DS. Thanks! Thomas
>>>>> "Yann" == Yann E MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> writes: > For various reasons, we've always suggested users to avoid using a > branch as version string for their packages, because it does not work > as a they would expect: > - it is not reproducible, because the branch may change between two > builds that are done at different times; > - it does not even follow the branch, as Buildroot anyway generates > a local tarball, which it will reuse on subsequent builds. > Furthermore, since we fetch and not pull, any existing local branch > is not updated. > Yet, until recently, using a branch name would just work (with the > above limitations): the git tree was cloned, the branch checked out, > and the tarball created. > But with the advent of the git caching, using a branch name does not > work anymore. Indeed, we now do a git-fetch, and that does not create > local master branch. So we can't check out master, because it does not > exist locally. And for other branches, as noticed above, the local > branch does not get udpated to the remote one. > Furthermore, the local branches are only created by chance, again as a > side-effect of trying to fetch the "special refs". > So, we can't say that we reliably support the use of a branch name. > Update the manual to state that using a branch does not work. Remove > the 'stable' example, as it looked like the name of a stable branch; > instead, replace it with a version string that ressemble a tag. > Fix the layout of the manual by making the version examples an actual > bulleted list. > Note: the above is only entirely true for git. For Mercurial, CVS and > subversion, the status may be mixed, but nonetheless, using branches is > still a bad idea, if at least because it is not reproducible, and > because Buildroot does not even follow the branch. So, we do not > differentiate between the various SCMs, and just flatly state that using > a branch name is not supported. > Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> > Cc: Thomas De Schampheleire <patrickdepinguin@gmail.com> > Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> > Cc: Maxime Hadjinlian <maxime.hadjinlian@gmail.com> > Cc: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com> > --- > Changes v1 -> v2: > - enhance commit log with additional details (Ricardo) > - blurb about > - typoes in commit log (Ricardo) Committed to 2018.02.x, thanks. While we do not have the reworked download support (and hence the issue that triggered this), we should still not recommend people to use branch names as versions.
diff --git a/docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt b/docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt index 7e1f246752..8ea8ce6037 100644 --- a/docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt +++ b/docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt @@ -199,12 +199,12 @@ information is (assuming the package name is +libfoo+) : * +LIBFOO_VERSION+, mandatory, must contain the version of the package. Note that if +HOST_LIBFOO_VERSION+ doesn't exist, it is assumed to be the same as +LIBFOO_VERSION+. It can also be a - revision number, branch or tag for packages that are fetched - directly from their revision control system. + - Examples: + - +LIBFOO_VERSION = 0.1.2+ + - +LIBFOO_VERSION = cb9d6aa9429e838f0e54faa3d455bcbab5eef057+ + - +LIBFOO_VERSION = stable+ + revision number or a tag for packages that are fetched directly + from their revision control system. Do not use a branch name as + version; it does not work. Examples: + ** a version for a release tarball: +LIBFOO_VERSION = 0.1.2+ + ** a sha1 for a git tree: +LIBFOO_VERSION = cb9d6aa9429e838f0e54faa3d455bcbab5eef057+ + ** a tag for a git tree +LIBFOO_VERSION = v0.1.2+ * +LIBFOO_SOURCE+ may contain the name of the tarball of the package, which Buildroot will use to download the tarball from
For various reasons, we've always suggested users to avoid using a branch as version string for their packages, because it does not work as a they would expect: - it is not reproducible, because the branch may change between two builds that are done at different times; - it does not even follow the branch, as Buildroot anyway generates a local tarball, which it will reuse on subsequent builds. Furthermore, since we fetch and not pull, any existing local branch is not updated. Yet, until recently, using a branch name would just work (with the above limitations): the git tree was cloned, the branch checked out, and the tarball created. But with the advent of the git caching, using a branch name does not work anymore. Indeed, we now do a git-fetch, and that does not create local master branch. So we can't check out master, because it does not exist locally. And for other branches, as noticed above, the local branch does not get udpated to the remote one. Furthermore, the local branches are only created by chance, again as a side-effect of trying to fetch the "special refs". So, we can't say that we reliably support the use of a branch name. Update the manual to state that using a branch does not work. Remove the 'stable' example, as it looked like the name of a stable branch; instead, replace it with a version string that ressemble a tag. Fix the layout of the manual by making the version examples an actual bulleted list. Note: the above is only entirely true for git. For Mercurial, CVS and subversion, the status may be mixed, but nonetheless, using branches is still a bad idea, if at least because it is not reproducible, and because Buildroot does not even follow the branch. So, we do not differentiate between the various SCMs, and just flatly state that using a branch name is not supported. Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> Cc: Thomas De Schampheleire <patrickdepinguin@gmail.com> Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> Cc: Maxime Hadjinlian <maxime.hadjinlian@gmail.com> Cc: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com> --- Changes v1 -> v2: - enhance commit log with additional details (Ricardo) - blurb about - typoes in commit log (Ricardo) --- docs/manual/adding-packages-generic.txt | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)