kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Adam Wolf <adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

So I originally used git am.  I apply 4 patches, so my first release was
5.0.2-4-SOMESHA.  I want to make a new version, that is obviously newer and
higher than that.

I asked Wayne, and he said to apply the macOS-packaging-specific patches
outside of git, so that git describe is OK.  I forgot that it would
describe it as dirty.

Maybe, in order to get clean, obvious version numbers, I should I apply
with git am, and then make a local tag?  Thoughts?

Adam

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 1:41 PM Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> If you use `git am` to apply the patches, you wont get -dirty appended
> to the version string.  However, you will end up with -###-gcommithash
> appended so you still wont end up with 5.0.2 as the version string which
> is what I'm gessing Adam is looking for.
>
> On 1/18/19 2:33 PM, Nick Østergaard wrote:
> > Mmm, what is wrong wit the git describe when the patches are applied
> > with git am?
> >
> > fre. 18. jan. 2019 20.11 skrev Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx
> > <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>>:
> >
> >     This is a result of modifications to the repo.  The --dirty option of
> >     `git describe` checks to see anything is modified and appends -dirty
> to
> >     the version string.  This way we know if someone modified the source
> for
> >     a given commit.  You could change the command in
> >     CreateGitVersionHeader.cmake to `git descibe` to drop -dirty from the
> >     version string.
> >
> >     Wayne
> >
> >     On 1/18/19 1:40 PM, Adam Wolf wrote:
> >     > Hi Wayne!
> >     >
> >     > I have since fixed the ngspice build race condition on macOS. I
> have
> >     > modified the build scripts so that patches occur via patch, not git
> >     > itself.  Unfortunately, now the git version info shows
> >     5.0.2-dirty.  Is
> >     > this how it shows on the Windows builds too?
> >     >
> >     > Adam Wolf
> >     >
> >     > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 9:05 AM Adam Wolf
> >     <adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >     > <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
> >     >
> >     >     Alright.  Those changes are made.  I am doing builds now.
> >     They are
> >     >     going to be 5.0.2-5 in order to ... reduce confusion.
> >     >
> >     >     After builds, I need to upload them to testing/, download
> >     them, run
> >     >     them through a test procedure that's in the README, and then
> >     see if
> >     >     this fixes the issues for users.  If so, I will move the
> 5.0.2-5
> >     >     packages to stable/, and adjust the website.
> >     >
> >     >     In the meantime, I am going to move the 5.0.2 packages out of
> the
> >     >     way on the server.  I'm getting multiple tickets a day for the
> >     same
> >     >     issue and we don't need more people downloading the bad macOS
> >     >     package.  Once we have the new package up, we can put it back
> for
> >     >     posterity's sake or whatever.
> >     >
> >     >     Adam
> >     >
> >     >     On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 8:15 AM Adam Wolf
> >     >     <adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
> >     >
> >     >         Thanks Wayne.  Will do.  I appreciate your fast response.
> >     >
> >     >         Adam
> >     >
> >     >         On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:58 AM Wayne Stambaugh
> >     >         <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>
> >     <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
> >     >
> >     >             Hey Adam,
> >     >
> >     >             Rather than committing the macos build patches to the
> git
> >     >             repo, why not
> >     >             just run patch from the build script to apply them?
> This
> >     >             way you don't
> >     >             taint the git repo commit log and the version string
> >     will be
> >     >             5.0.2
> >     >             assuming that it the branch that you are building.
> >     This is
> >     >             how we have
> >     >             done this in the past on other platforms.
> >     >
> >     >             Cheers,
> >     >
> >     >             Wayne
> >     >
> >     >             On 1/8/2019 8:41 AM, Adam Wolf wrote:
> >     >             > Hi Wayne,
> >     >             >
> >     >             > I need a judgement call, and it's a little urgent.
> >     >             >
> >     >             > The current Mac packages call themselves 5.0.2, but
> the
> >     >             version
> >     >             > information inside is Version: (5.0.2-4-g3082e92af),
> >     >             release build.
> >     >             > This is because there are 4 patches applied to the
> 5.0.2
> >     >             source during
> >     >             > packaging.  These are exclusively for packaging
> changes,
> >     >             mostly to get
> >     >             > Python to work the way it needs to be
> >     redistributable for
> >     >             macOS. Without
> >     >             > these patches, kicad works, but it does not work in a
> >     >             redistributable
> >     >             > way.  If they were included in upstream, they
> >     wouldn't work at
> >     >             > all--unless folks also used the rest of the macOS
> build
> >     >             script.  Because
> >     >             > of this, I deemed it reasonable to include the
> >     patches in
> >     >             the macOS
> >     >             > build script process.
> >     >             >
> >     >             > I need to rerelease the 5.0.2 packages.  Normally,
> >     the way
> >     >             this would be
> >     >             > done on other projects is that I would make a 5.0.2-2
> >     >             release.  I
> >     >             > actually built those this weekend, but the problem
> >     is that
> >     >             folks could
> >     >             > definitely think they are already running 5.0.2-4.
> >     >             >
> >     >             > I thought, oh, ok! For release builds, we should
> >     override
> >     >             the git
> >     >             > version string, and burn in what we're building, so
> that
> >     >             would just say
> >     >             > Version: (5.0.2), release build.  It appears we
> cannot
> >     >             override the git
> >     >             > generated part, only append to the end.
> >     >             >
> >     >             > Normally I'd throw this to the list and wait a while
> for
> >     >             consensus, but
> >     >             > many Mac users are reporting issues with the current
> >     5.0.2
> >     >             package and
> >     >             > it needs to be replaced as soon as we can.
> >     >             >
> >     >             > One option would be to "fix it for this release" by
> >     adding
> >     >             yet another
> >     >             > patch that makes it so the gitversion can be
> overridden,
> >     >             make a 5.0.2-5
> >     >             > release, and get those patches upstreamed behind some
> >     >             conditionals
> >     >             > before the next release, so that the gitversion, next
> >     >             time, will be 5.1
> >     >             > or 5.0.3 or whatever, and then I could append a -2 or
> >     >             whatever if this
> >     >             > happens in the future...
> >     >             >
> >     >             > Thoughts?
> >     >             >
> >     >             > Adam Wolf
> >     >             >
> >     >             >
> >     >             > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 7:42 PM Adam Wolf
> >     >             <adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >             <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> >     >             > <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >             <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
> >     >             >
> >     >             >     It looks like there's something wrong with the
> >     shared
> >     >             library
> >     >             >     references of just the 5.0.2 packages.  They were
> >     >             generated using
> >     >             >     the build script, but not 100% automatically.
> I've
> >     >             set Jenkins up
> >     >             >     to build those too, which should help reduce
> human
> >     >             error next time.
> >     >             >
> >     >             >     This is assuming I fatfingered something in the
> >     build.
> >     >             >
> >     >             >     The nighties and 5.0.1 seem fine.
> >     >             >
> >     >             >     I have a contract delivery this week, and things
> >     are a
> >     >             little
> >     >             >     frantic, but I should still be able to get this
> >     fixed.
> >     >             >
> >     >             >     Adam
> >     >             >
> >     >             >     On Mon, Jan 7, 2019, 5:46 PM Andy Peters
> >     >             <devel@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:devel@xxxxxxxxx>
> >     <mailto:devel@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:devel@xxxxxxxxx>>
> >     >             >     <mailto:devel@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:devel@xxxxxxxxx>
> >     <mailto:devel@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:devel@xxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
> >     >             >
> >     >             >
> >     >             >
> >     >             >         > On Jan 7, 2019, at 3:20 PM, Adam Wolf
> >     >             >         <adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >             <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> >     >             >         <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >             <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:adamwolf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
> >     >             >         >
> >     >             >         > Hi folks!
> >     >             >         >
> >     >             >         > Just a heads up, the macos 5.0.2 packages
> are
> >     >             gross for some
> >     >             >         reason.  I am regenerating them and we'll see
> >     >             what's going on.
> >     >             >         >
> >     >             >         > (I am regenerating them at 5.0.2-2)
> >     >             >
> >     >             >         Gross in what way? I haven’t pulled down a
> >     nightly
> >     >             in a couple
> >     >             >         of weeks.
> >     >             >
> >     >             >         -a
> >     >             >
>  _______________________________________________
> >     >             >         Mailing list:
> >     https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     >             >         Post to     :
> >     kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >             <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> >     >             >         <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >             <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>
> >     >             >         Unsubscribe :
> >     https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     >             >         More help   :
> >     https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >     >             >
> >     >             >
> >     >             > _______________________________________________
> >     >             > Mailing list:
> https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     >             > Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >             <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> >     >             > Unsubscribe :
> https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     >             > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >     >             >
> >     >
> >     >             _______________________________________________
> >     >             Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     >             Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     >             <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> >     >             Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     >             More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >     >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >     <mailto:kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> >     More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >
>