linux-kernel - Re: Linux 2.6.32-rc3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4ACC12DD.60601@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 06 Oct 2009 21:02:37 -0700
From:	"Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Dirk Hohndel <hohndel@...radead.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.32-rc3

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Dave Airlie wrote:
>    
>> Why don't you just have the kernel version Linux-commitid?
>>      
>
> That's actually what I personally do 99% of the time. And, in fact, it's
> how CONFIG_LOCALVERSION_AUTO effectively works. It's very useful for doing
> things like
>
> 	gitk v$(uname -r)..
>
> which really does work (well, apart from the "-dirty" case when I've
> compiled a dirty kernel that has something that isn't committed). Try it.
> It's a great way to see "what do I have in my current tree that I'm not
> actually running".
>
> So with CONFIG_LOCALVERSION_AUTO, you can largely pretend that you really
> only have the git SHA1. The rest is "fluff" for people.
>
>    
>> why keep up the pretense that the 2.6.xx bit means anything outside of release?
>>      
>
> Agreed. However, it _does_ mean something for releases.
>
> And that is really how you should think of it. I update the kernel
> Makefile for releases, and nothing else. If you compile a non-release
> kernel, the version is meaningless - unless you have
> CONFIG_LOCALVERSION_AUTO.
>
>    
>> You could just have the tarball generation scripts make it into a 2.6.31 but
>> for everyone else we never see it.
>>      
>
> Well, about a year ago I actually considered generating the version
> entirely from the tags in the git tree, and do it entirely that way.
>
> The reason I didn't is that even if it only makes sense for releases, it
> is (a) tradition and (b) useful without (or across) SCM's and (c) human-
> readable. In fact, I tend to like seeing things like
>
> 	Linux version 2.6.32-rc2-00351-g58e57fb
>
> in my dmesg outputs, because it does mean something _outside_ of just the
> pure "git version" (the '58e57fb' part is sufficient as far as git is
> concerned). It does have a very human-readable component to it: it's 351
> commits after 2.6.32-rc2.
>
>    
As a total newbie, this took a few to see, but then once I connected the 
dots
made complete sense. (i.g. the how many commits 00351 and commit number 
g58e57fb)
> So I literally think that our current CONFIG_LOCALVERSION_AUTO includes
> the best of both worlds. It has the "uniquely identifying" part, but it
> also has a part that is human-readable and useful for that reason.
>
> 			Linus
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>    
just my $2
(as for the "+" and "-" tough to say, I'm happy as is,
as for the mistake with the version number well, "your human").

:-)

Justin P. Mattock
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/