[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Exact revision numbers in bugreports (was Re: pre-releases of rc1)
From:       Thiago Macieira <thiago () kde ! org>
Date:       2009-06-29 18:07:26
Message-ID: 200906292007.26542.thiago () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]


Em Segunda-feira 29 Junho 2009, ŕs 16:52:59, Lubos Lunak escreveu:
>  Moving to kde-core-devel.
>
> On Monday 29 of June 2009, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> > On Monday 29 June 2009 13:52:34 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > > It's not so much stress, but usefulness of the RC for us. If people
> > > report against RC1, and it isn't what RC1 is, the bugreport (which is
> > > in principle exactly why we do an RC) becomes less useful.
>
> ...
>
> > If there would be a way to have drkonqi sent the build date or even
> > better the svn revision number this "problem" would be solved.
>
>  Piece of cake :). Copy e.g. your libkdecore.so.5.3.0 somewhere and do:
>
> $ echo -n 'r1234567' >r.txt
> $ objcopy libkdecore.so.5.3.0
> libkdecore.so.5.3.0.tmp --add-section .note.kde=r.txt
> $ mv libkdecore.so.5.3.0.tmp libkdecore.so.5.3.0
>
>  Now the binary has the given revision number recorded in it as a separate
> section. To print it, 'objdump -s -j .note.kde libkdecore.so.5.3.0', and
> cut out only the relevant part.

It can also be done by writing the revision number to a .h.cmake header, then 
having:

static const char kderevision[] __attribute__((section(".note.kde"))) =
	KDE_REVISION;

This works on non-ELF systems, but it requires GCC.

I'd recommend that we do this regardless. And for package builds, we just 
write nothing.
-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
  Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Software
      PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
      E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]