[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1601311445300.5958@tp.orcam.me.uk>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 15:05:49 +0000
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...tec.com>
To: Alexander Kapshuk <alexander.kapshuk@...il.com>
CC: Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders@...tec.com>,
James Hogan <James.Hogan@...tec.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>,
"linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux MIPS Mailing List <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ld-version: fix it on Fedora
On Sat, 30 Jan 2016, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> > % echo 2.24.51.20140217 | ld-version.sh
> > 22451000
>
> So the above version is a non-release snapshot from the development tree
> as the repository trunk is switched to x.y+1.51 once a release branch for
> x.y has been made. Then the release branch is switched to x.y-1.90 for
> prereleases, before settling on x.y or x.y.0 (this hasn't been consistent)
> for the actual base release. Any subsequent maintenance releases will
> then have their version set to x.y.1, x.y.2, and so on. We shouldn't ever
> rely on versions that are not proper releases.
I need to correct myself here for unclear notation or off-by-one errors,
the flow is of course as follows:
trunk
x.y-1.51
|
|
|
release branchpoint
| \
x.y.51 x.y-1.90
| prerelease
| |
| |
v x.y-1.91
. prerelease
. |
. |
|
x.y-1.92
prerelease
.
.
.
x.y.0
base release
|
|
|
x.y.1
maintenance release
|
|
|
x.y.2
maintenance release
|
v
.
.
.
The revision number is sometimes bumped up on trunk as well, to 52, 53,
etc., though the criteria are not completely clear to me; perhaps to make
a trunk snapshot "release".
And last but not least for non-release builds the snapshot date is
automatically appended to the version number reported, as seen above.
Maciej
Powered by blists - more mailing lists