Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756923AbZJFQbN (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:31:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756499AbZJFQbM (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:31:12 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:34313 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754978AbZJFQbM (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:31:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 18:29:41 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Dirk Hohndel , Len Brown , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.32-rc3 Message-ID: <20091006162941.GA20590@elte.hu> References: <1254797502.14122.146.camel@dhohndel-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com> <20091006144449.GA23078@elte.hu> <20091006153632.GA29795@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2182 Lines: 55 * Linus Torvalds wrote: > Unless: > > > _That_ i think is a lot harder to confuse with the real .31 than a > > v2.6.31-1234-g16123c4 version string. > > .. are you saying that it would be just some automatically generated > thing, just a crippled form of CONFIG_LOCALVERSION_AUTO? Kind of a > CONFIG_LOCALVERSION_AUTO_SHORTFORM? Yes, exactly. Not a Makefile or tag property, obviously. > If so, then I don't hate "v2.6.31+", but at the same time, that single > plus-sign tells _so_much_ less than v2.6.31-1234-g16123c4 that I think > it's really sad and crippled. Agreed, and in my internal testing i've made LOCALVERSION_AUTO compulsory long time ago. But at least to me there's a simple benchmark: i have been confused by this. In one of the merge windows i thought i booted .31 vanilla while in fact it was a few days into the merge window already. Took me a few minutes to figure out why it was crashing ;-) YMMV. Maybe a variant of the full string: v2.6.31+1234-g16123c4 would be even less confusing. I tend to ignore dashes sub-consciously (as a 'minor versions' kind of thing) - while in this ~1 week out of the 9 weeks of your tree's cycle it means something much more than that, and we dont emphasise the difference strongly enough. But ... that's just my own experience. I also see -tip users become a lot more cautious for a few rc's once we go -rc1 - while they happily test things in the merge window (which is _way_ more dangerous than pretty much any post-rc1 tree you push out). Basically IMHO the inflection point between v2.6.31 and the merge window is way too 'smooth', and not obviously so, and it lures people who are not careful enough into testing something they probably wouldnt test otherwise. It's a purely human thing - to a machine it's already very obvious what g16123c4 means - it doesnt need any of the fancy v2.6.31 stuff either. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/