dash/share/genbuild.sh

40 lines
1.1 KiB
Bash
Raw Permalink Normal View History

#!/bin/sh
# Copyright (c) 2012-2020 The Bitcoin Core developers
# Distributed under the MIT software license, see the accompanying
# file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.
export LC_ALL=C
if [ $# -gt 1 ]; then
cd "$2" || exit 1
fi
if [ $# -gt 0 ]; then
FILE="$1"
shift
if [ -f "$FILE" ]; then
INFO="$(head -n 1 "$FILE")"
fi
else
echo "Usage: $0 <filename> <srcroot>"
exit 1
fi
feat: Set client version for non-release binaries and version in guix based on git tags (#5653) ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented Client version string is inconsistent. Building `v20.0.0-beta.8` tag locally produces binaries that report `v20.0.0-beta.8` version but binaries built in guix would report `v20.0.0rc1-g3e732a952226a20505f907e4fd9b3fdbb14ea5ee` instead. Building any commit after `v20.0.0-beta.8` locally would result in versions like `v20.0.0rc1-8c94153d2497` which is close but it's still yet another format. And both versions with `rc1` in their names are confusing cause you'd expect them to mention `beta.8` instead maybe (or is it just me? :D ). ## What was done? Change it so that the version string would look like this: on tag: ~`v20.0.0-beta.8-dev` or `v20.0.0-beta.8-gitarc`~ `v20.0.0-beta.8` post-tag: ~`v20.0.0-beta.8-1-gb837e08164-gitarc`~ `v20.0.0-beta.8-1-gb837e08164` post-tag format is `recent tag`-`commits since that tag`-`g+12 chars of commit hash`-`dirty (optional)` ~-`dev or gitarc`~ ~`dev`/`gitarc` suffixes should help avoiding confusion with the release versions and they also indicate the way non-release binaries were built.~ Note that release binaries do not use any of this, they still use `PACKAGE_VERSION` from `configure` like before. Also, `CLIENT_VERSION_RC` is no longer used in this setup so it was removed. Few things aren't clear to me yet: 1. Version bump in `configure.ac` no longer affects the reported version (unless it's an actual release). Are there any downsides I might be missing? 2. Which tag should we use on `develop` once we bump version in configure? `v21.0.0-init`? `v21.0.0-alpha1`? 3. How is it going to behave once `merge master back into develop` kind of PR is merged? E.g. say `develop` branch is on `v21.0.0-alpha1` tag and we merge v20.1.0 from `master` back into it. Will this bring `v20.1.0` release tag into `develop`? Will it become the one that will be used from that moment? If so we will probably need another tag on `develop` every time such PR is merged e.g. `v21.0.0-alpha2` (or whatever the next number is). Don't think these are blockers but would like to hear thoughts from others. ## How Has This Been Tested? Built binaries locally, built them using guix at a specific tag and at some commit on top of it. ## Breaking Changes n/a ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
2024-01-12 04:43:42 +01:00
GIT_DESCRIPTION=""
Merge #18556: build: Drop make dist in gitian builds 2aa48edec0101f8a77a2189244fc62722ff7a123 refactor: Drop unused ${WRAP_DIR}/${HOST} directory (Hennadii Stepanov) 1362be044724bb49d785ca2e296a3b43343c1690 build: Drop make dist in gitian builds (Hennadii Stepanov) Pull request description: After the merge of #18331, the packaged source tarball is created by `git archive`, but the binaries are built from another one which is made by `make dist`. With this PR the only source tarball, created by `git archive`, is used both for binaries building and for packaging to users. Close #16588. Close #18547. As a good side-effect, #18349 becomes redundant. **Change in behavior** The following variables https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/1b151e3ffce7c1a2ee46bf280cc1d96775d1f91e/configure.ac#L2-L6 are no longer used for naming of directories and tarballs. Instead of them the gitian descriptors use a git tag (if available) or a commit hash. --- Also a small refactor commit picked from #18404. ACKs for top commit: dongcarl: ACK 2aa48edec0101f8a77a2189244fc62722ff7a123 MarcoFalke: ACK 2aa48edec0101f8a77a2189244fc62722ff7a123 fanquake: ACK 2aa48edec0101f8a77a2189244fc62722ff7a123 - I've had a quick look over this, and don't want to block merging if this actually gets as closer to finally having this all sorted out. Obviously we've still got #18741, and after speaking to Carl this morning, there will likely be even more changes after that (not Guix specific). Tree-SHA512: d3b16f87e48d1790a3264940c28acd5d881bfd10f3ce94fb0c8a6af76d8039289d01e0cd4972adac49ae24362857251f6c1e5e09e3e9fbf636c10708b4015a7c
2020-04-28 10:28:34 +02:00
if [ "${BITCOIN_GENBUILD_NO_GIT}" != "1" ] && [ -e "$(command -v git)" ] && [ "$(git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree 2>/dev/null)" = "true" ]; then
# clean 'dirty' status of touched files that haven't been modified
git diff >/dev/null 2>/dev/null
feat: Set client version for non-release binaries and version in guix based on git tags (#5653) ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented Client version string is inconsistent. Building `v20.0.0-beta.8` tag locally produces binaries that report `v20.0.0-beta.8` version but binaries built in guix would report `v20.0.0rc1-g3e732a952226a20505f907e4fd9b3fdbb14ea5ee` instead. Building any commit after `v20.0.0-beta.8` locally would result in versions like `v20.0.0rc1-8c94153d2497` which is close but it's still yet another format. And both versions with `rc1` in their names are confusing cause you'd expect them to mention `beta.8` instead maybe (or is it just me? :D ). ## What was done? Change it so that the version string would look like this: on tag: ~`v20.0.0-beta.8-dev` or `v20.0.0-beta.8-gitarc`~ `v20.0.0-beta.8` post-tag: ~`v20.0.0-beta.8-1-gb837e08164-gitarc`~ `v20.0.0-beta.8-1-gb837e08164` post-tag format is `recent tag`-`commits since that tag`-`g+12 chars of commit hash`-`dirty (optional)` ~-`dev or gitarc`~ ~`dev`/`gitarc` suffixes should help avoiding confusion with the release versions and they also indicate the way non-release binaries were built.~ Note that release binaries do not use any of this, they still use `PACKAGE_VERSION` from `configure` like before. Also, `CLIENT_VERSION_RC` is no longer used in this setup so it was removed. Few things aren't clear to me yet: 1. Version bump in `configure.ac` no longer affects the reported version (unless it's an actual release). Are there any downsides I might be missing? 2. Which tag should we use on `develop` once we bump version in configure? `v21.0.0-init`? `v21.0.0-alpha1`? 3. How is it going to behave once `merge master back into develop` kind of PR is merged? E.g. say `develop` branch is on `v21.0.0-alpha1` tag and we merge v20.1.0 from `master` back into it. Will this bring `v20.1.0` release tag into `develop`? Will it become the one that will be used from that moment? If so we will probably need another tag on `develop` every time such PR is merged e.g. `v21.0.0-alpha2` (or whatever the next number is). Don't think these are blockers but would like to hear thoughts from others. ## How Has This Been Tested? Built binaries locally, built them using guix at a specific tag and at some commit on top of it. ## Breaking Changes n/a ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
2024-01-12 04:43:42 +01:00
# override using the tag name from git, i.e. string like "v20.0.0-beta.8-5-g99786590df6f-dirty"
GIT_DESCRIPTION=$(git describe --abbrev=12 --dirty 2>/dev/null)
fi
feat: Set client version for non-release binaries and version in guix based on git tags (#5653) ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented Client version string is inconsistent. Building `v20.0.0-beta.8` tag locally produces binaries that report `v20.0.0-beta.8` version but binaries built in guix would report `v20.0.0rc1-g3e732a952226a20505f907e4fd9b3fdbb14ea5ee` instead. Building any commit after `v20.0.0-beta.8` locally would result in versions like `v20.0.0rc1-8c94153d2497` which is close but it's still yet another format. And both versions with `rc1` in their names are confusing cause you'd expect them to mention `beta.8` instead maybe (or is it just me? :D ). ## What was done? Change it so that the version string would look like this: on tag: ~`v20.0.0-beta.8-dev` or `v20.0.0-beta.8-gitarc`~ `v20.0.0-beta.8` post-tag: ~`v20.0.0-beta.8-1-gb837e08164-gitarc`~ `v20.0.0-beta.8-1-gb837e08164` post-tag format is `recent tag`-`commits since that tag`-`g+12 chars of commit hash`-`dirty (optional)` ~-`dev or gitarc`~ ~`dev`/`gitarc` suffixes should help avoiding confusion with the release versions and they also indicate the way non-release binaries were built.~ Note that release binaries do not use any of this, they still use `PACKAGE_VERSION` from `configure` like before. Also, `CLIENT_VERSION_RC` is no longer used in this setup so it was removed. Few things aren't clear to me yet: 1. Version bump in `configure.ac` no longer affects the reported version (unless it's an actual release). Are there any downsides I might be missing? 2. Which tag should we use on `develop` once we bump version in configure? `v21.0.0-init`? `v21.0.0-alpha1`? 3. How is it going to behave once `merge master back into develop` kind of PR is merged? E.g. say `develop` branch is on `v21.0.0-alpha1` tag and we merge v20.1.0 from `master` back into it. Will this bring `v20.1.0` release tag into `develop`? Will it become the one that will be used from that moment? If so we will probably need another tag on `develop` every time such PR is merged e.g. `v21.0.0-alpha2` (or whatever the next number is). Don't think these are blockers but would like to hear thoughts from others. ## How Has This Been Tested? Built binaries locally, built them using guix at a specific tag and at some commit on top of it. ## Breaking Changes n/a ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
2024-01-12 04:43:42 +01:00
if [ -n "$GIT_DESCRIPTION" ]; then
NEWINFO="#define BUILD_GIT_DESCRIPTION \"$GIT_DESCRIPTION\""
else
NEWINFO="// No build information available"
fi
# only update build.h if necessary
if [ "$INFO" != "$NEWINFO" ]; then
echo "$NEWINFO" >"$FILE"
fi