Re: RSB Git modified status

[Gedare Bloom]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Chris Johns  wrote:
> On 19/04/2016 02:34, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>
>> I didn't quite follow. Is this to determine whether RSB should do
>> something?
>
>
> I am sorry, I should have provided more of a context.
>
>> I guess this is caused by some bootstrap or configure that
>> creates untracked files in a repo?
>
>
> Yes.
>
>>
>> What does it matter?
>>
>
> It is used to create the version message, for example gcc ...
>
> $ i386-rtems4.12-gcc --version
> i386-rtems4.12-gcc (GCC) 6.0.0 20160327 (RTEMS 4.12, RSB
> 6843e47ce33961e5a705285f3af7a78cae0c2891-modified, Newlib 2.4.0)
>
> This lets us know if the repo is clean or dirty and if changes have been
> made. It helps us support users and it can be part of the evidence in an
> audit.
>
For this specific use, I would not call it modified, because it is
useful to differentiate between a tree that has actually been modified
by a user, and a build that is "vanilla" with only modifications
introduced by auto-gen files. Any untracked files present should only
affect the build if the user also modifies tracked files (short of a
user hacking Makefile.in and configure files, too).
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: RSB Git modified status

[Chris Johns]

On 19/04/2016 08:11, Gedare Bloom wrote:

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Chris Johns  wrote:

This lets us know if the repo is clean or dirty and if changes have been
made. It helps us support users and it can be part of the evidence in an
audit.


For this specific use, I would not call it modified, because it is
useful to differentiate between a tree that has actually been modified
by a user, and a build that is "vanilla" with only modifications
introduced by auto-gen files. Any untracked files present should only
affect the build if the user also modifies tracked files (short of a
user hacking Makefile.in and configure files, too).


This is what I also think. The RSB is unique because you can add a new 
file or a few files and use those but they would tend to result in 
different version numbers showing up in other parts.


I will push a patch.

Thanks
Chris
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: RSB Git modified status

[Chris Johns]

On 19/04/2016 02:34, Gedare Bloom wrote:

I didn't quite follow. Is this to determine whether RSB should do
something?


I am sorry, I should have provided more of a context.


I guess this is caused by some bootstrap or configure that
creates untracked files in a repo?


Yes.



What does it matter?



It is used to create the version message, for example gcc ...

$ i386-rtems4.12-gcc --version
i386-rtems4.12-gcc (GCC) 6.0.0 20160327 (RTEMS 4.12, RSB 
6843e47ce33961e5a705285f3af7a78cae0c2891-modified, Newlib 2.4.0)


This lets us know if the repo is clean or dirty and if changes have been 
made. It helps us support users and it can be part of the evidence in an 
audit.


Chris
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: RSB Git modified status

[Gedare Bloom]

I didn't quite follow. Is this to determine whether RSB should do
something? I guess this is caused by some bootstrap or configure that
creates untracked files in a repo?

What does it matter?

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Chris Johns  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At the moment the RSB says untracked files in a git repo is modified.
>
> Is this valid or this is a distraction? For example if I have 'x' as a file
> in the repo it is seen as untracked and so modified and nothing in the RSB
> has been changed.
>
> I am currently leaning to not modified.
>
> Chris
> ___
> devel mailing list
> devel@rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel