[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] mesa: Allow custom text to be inserted in version string at buildtime

[Eric Anholt]

Chad Versace <chad.versace at linux.intel.com> writes:

> On 04/23/2013 09:19 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> Chad Versace <chad.versace at linux.intel.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 04/23/2013 06:19 AM, Ian Romanick wrote:
>>>> On 04/23/2013 03:28 AM, Chad Versace wrote:
>>>>> This allows maintainers/packagers/testers to tag the build with
>>>>> information that will be reported by GL_VERSION.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the environemt variable or make variable MESA_VERSION_STRING_EXTRA is
>>>>            environment
>>>>
>>>>> set, then its values will appear in the GL_VERSION string immediately
>>>>> after "Mesa X.Y" and before "(git-xxxxxxx)".
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch implements supports MESA_VERSION_STRING_EXTRA only for Android.
>>>>> Other build systems are left as an excercise.
>>>>
>>>> Why is this useful?
>>>
>>> The commit message says why: it allows packagers to tag the build with info
>>> that gets reported by GL_VERSION.
>>>
>>> How is it used now? The Mesa that gets shipped bi-weekly internally in Intel
>>> for Android is not a snapshot of master nor of any stable branch. Yet, that
>>> snapshot of Mesa is "official", as far as Intel's Android efforts are concerned.
>>> The Android team is using this patch to inject into GL_VERSION the name of the bi-weekly
>>> Android release.
>>>
>>> Without this patch, you may one day get a bug report that says: "This bug exists
>>> in Mesa 9.2-devel (git-xxxxxxx)". Then, you will search for the git sha1, and
>>> unable to find it, yell bloody murder and close the bug as invalid. With this
>>> patch, though, you may get a bug report that says: "This bug exists in
>>> Mesa 9.2-devel otc-android-2013-04-23-blah (git-xxxxxxx)", and then you
>>> will know how to find that Mesa.
>>
>> So along with a useless sha1, I have a useless date that doesn't tell me
>> what Mesa it was actually based off of.  I say this having tried to
>> figure out what Mesa actually got used in one of these android tests and
>> failed.
>
> Rather than jabs and parrying, let's turn this conversation into a
> constructive one. If you receive a
> communication about Mesa on Android, how do you want the Mesa version
> communicated to you so that you can fetch and then inspect that same Mesa?
>
> Keep in mind that the Android Mesa tree is regularly rebased onto master, so  the shas
> are not as useful as you would hope. Also know that we have git tags for
> the "useless" dates if you know where to fetch from.

What I want most importantly is the sha1 from Mesa master that android
was forked from (so I can quickly answer "was this run with the hiz
changes we made?" for example).  Secondarily, I want the sha1 for the
secret tree so that I can go log it (which will always be available, if
you're tagging them all) if I really need to find what hacks were put on
top.  So far, the one time I went and actually did that, it wasn't that
interesting.

A date that corresponds to a tag is only less specific than the sha1
pointed to by the tag.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20130424/fff08094/attachment.pgp>