[Mulgara-dev] Re: [Mulgara-svn] r206 - trunk

[Life is hard, and then you die]

On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 09:29:37AM -0600, Paul Gearon wrote:
> Yes it would be much better.  I had forgotten to set this up, until  
> the other day when someone told me the build number they were  
> running, and I realized that the number was meaningless.  I thought a  
> good interim step would be to update it manually.
> 
> The *best* way to update this number would be via a script at checkin  
> time.  That way the build machine doesn't have to be connected to the  
> network.  But if that's infeasible, then calling across the network  
> would be OK, I guess.

I'n not sure we're talking quite the same thing. I'm suggestion not
storing the build number anywhere, but generating it on demand. I.e.
the 'version' file contains just the bsae version (e.g. "v1.0.0"), and
the build script tacks on the current version of the working copy that
is being used to do the build. This means the build number accurately
reflects what was used to build, no network access is needed, and the
version file only needs bumping on true version bumps. Or in shell
script terms the tag becomes "`cat version`.`svnversion`".

Note that if the current working copy contains more than one version,
or contains modifications, the string returned by svnversion will
reflect that (e.g. "190:206M" shows that my working copy has multiple
version and local modifications) - so you can immediately tell if the
build was from a mixed or modified working copy.


  Cheers,

  Ronald


> On Mar 2, 2007, at 4:11 AM, Life is hard, and then you die wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 10:41:42AM -0600, pag at mulgara.org wrote:
> >>Author: pag
> >>Date: 2007-03-01 10:41:41 -0600 (Thu, 01 Mar 2007)
> >>New Revision: 206
> >>
> >>Modified:
> >>   trunk/version
> >>Log:
> >>New revision to match svn
> >>
> >>Modified: trunk/version
> >>===================================================================
> >>--- trunk/version	2007-03-01 07:47:55 UTC (rev 205)
> >>+++ trunk/version	2007-03-01 16:41:41 UTC (rev 206)
> >>@@ -1 +1 @@
> >>-v1.0.0.1
> >>+v1.0.0.206
> >
> >Is the last number always meant to be the subversion revision number?
> >If so, wouldn't it be better to run 'svnversion' to get that version
> >at build time? (I'll offer to do it)
> >
> >
> >  Cheers,
> >
> >  Ronald
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Mulgara-dev mailing list
> >Mulgara-dev at mulgara.org
> >http://mulgara.org/mailman/listinfo/mulgara-dev