Rockbox mail archive
Subject: Re: Branch for updated/initial bootloaders for USB-enabled PP and AMS Sansas (and their installers)Re: Branch for updated/initial bootloaders for USB-enabled PP and AMS Sansas (and their installers)
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel_at_haxx.se>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 19:07:29 +0200 (CEST)
On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, Thomas Martitz wrote:
>> just been specified when building the binaries. e.g. "make VERSION=3.0".
> That's just bad IMO.
I disagree. It's the simplest and most elegant way in my view.
> Someone checks out the tag to recompile the release bootloader for whatever
> reason and doesn't get the same as installing it from the download server.
> The source the binary is built from should have the version also IMO, that's
> clearer than implying knowledge of some make parameters.
Then I suggest you commit a README to the branch that says "I built the
release on this branch with make VERSION=[num]" or possibly make a
"release.sh" script that just runs that command line.
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 19:07:29 +0200 (CEST)
On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, Thomas Martitz wrote:
>> just been specified when building the binaries. e.g. "make VERSION=3.0".
> That's just bad IMO.
I disagree. It's the simplest and most elegant way in my view.
> Someone checks out the tag to recompile the release bootloader for whatever
> reason and doesn't get the same as installing it from the download server.
> The source the binary is built from should have the version also IMO, that's
> clearer than implying knowledge of some make parameters.
Then I suggest you commit a README to the branch that says "I built the
release on this branch with make VERSION=[num]" or possibly make a
"release.sh" script that just runs that command line.
-- / daniel.haxx.seReceived on 2009-07-08
Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy