Am Dienstag, 25. November 2014 um 19:04:45, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <lasgout...@lyx.org> > Le 25/11/2014 11:55, Kornel Benko a écrit : > > Am Montag, 24. November 2014 um 22:04:10, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > > <lasgout...@lyx.org> > >> I have not dont anything like lyx_date.h yet. How do you use it? Is it > >> the build date? > > > > It is the build date. Similar to commit_hash. > > That's what I thought. It is actually the rlease date, which is a > different beast. > > I have pushed some changes that make sure that the build date is now > correct, as long as you make sure that version.o is recompiled everytime > lyx is built. This is the case with autotools at least.
The way it is now in cmake is to recompile every time the date changes.
a.) Create temporary file lyx_date.tmp
b.) check if different to lyx_date.h
b1.) overwrite if yes.
ATM I need lyx_date.h /and/ lyx_commit_hash.h to ensure the recompilation of
version.cpp.
> I propose to get rid of this lyx_date.h header file, unless I missed
> something.
Please no. In case of recompiling version.cpp each time (even if not needed),
there will be also unneeded linking too.
> I will next propose something for the release date: instead of the "not
> released" yet text, I propose to show the git commit if we have one.
> Would that make sense? I would think that the git commit is not needed
> for a real build, since in this case the release is tagged, and normal
> users do not need to know about this git business.
+1
> JMarc
>
Kornel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
