On 2011/4/1 9:24, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Dan Nicholson<dbn.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Eric Anholt<e...@anholt.net> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 13:56:56 -0700, Corbin Simpson<mostawesomed...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Ian Romanick<i...@freedesktop.org> wrote:
From: Ian Romanick<ian.d.roman...@intel.com>
---
Makefile | 8 ++++++++
src/mesa/main/version.c | 7 ++++++-
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index a1ab65e..c85b903 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -5,7 +5,15 @@ TOP = .
SUBDIRS = src
+# The git command below generates an empty string when we're not
+# building in a GIT tree (i.e., building from a release tarball).
default: $(TOP)/configs/current
+ @touch src/mesa/main/git_sha1.h
+ @if which git> /dev/null; then \
+ git log -n 1 --oneline |\
+ sed 's/^\([^ ]*\) .*/#define MESA_GIT_SHA1 "\1"/' \
+> src/mesa/main/git_sha1.h; \
+ fi
@for dir in $(SUBDIRS) ; do \
if [ -d $$dir ] ; then \
(cd $$dir&& $(MAKE)) || exit 1 ; \
diff --git a/src/mesa/main/version.c b/src/mesa/main/version.c
index c7a0d69..80fa0c2 100644
--- a/src/mesa/main/version.c
+++ b/src/mesa/main/version.c
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
#include "imports.h"
#include "mtypes.h"
#include "version.h"
+#include "git_sha1.h"
@@ -185,7 +186,11 @@ compute_version(struct gl_context *ctx)
ctx->VersionString = (char *) malloc(max);
if (ctx->VersionString) {
_mesa_snprintf(ctx->VersionString, max,
- "%u.%u Mesa " MESA_VERSION_STRING,
+ "%u.%u Mesa " MESA_VERSION_STRING
+#ifdef MESA_GIT_SHA1
+ " (" MESA_GIT_SHA1 ")"
+#endif
+ ,
ctx->VersionMajor, ctx->VersionMinor);
}
}
--
1.7.4
Hmm, wouldn't the output of "git describe" be more useful?
That's what we talked about initially, but since we tag releases of the
stable branches, "git describe" of master says:
snb-magic-2692-gb3d1c77
which is some tag off master that we pushed last year.
I think krh knows the magic command, but "git rev-list HEAD" works here.
Well, no, there really isn't a good way to get a more readable output,
since we only tag the stable branches and typically only after a few
commits happen. So if you look at the commits reachable from master,
none of them have (meaningful) tags, which means that there is nothing
for git describe to base a more readable name on.
Kristian
How about we deliberately add some tag to indicate current master branch
is in which stage:
Like after 7.10 release, we tag it as 7.11-dev or something alike
Thanks
--Shuang
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
