[Nut-upsdev] [nut-commits] svn commit r2402 - in branches/svn-auto-changelog: . tools
aquette.dev at gmail.com
Sat Mar 27 00:32:10 UTC 2010
2010/3/22 Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>
> On Mar 19, 2010, at 1:21 PM, Arnaud Quette wrote:
>>> At r2403, the code does not force the creation of a ChangeLog if a
>>> user simply checks out the source, then runs autoreconf, configure and
>>> make. I am wondering if we should remove the "|| echo" portion, and
>>> simply add a "touch ChangeLog" on the buildslaves that don't have
>>> svn2cl (and wouldn't need it, since they are not all distributing
>>> tarball snapshots).
>> nice job.
>> I'm in favor of keeping the failure warning msg, while touching ChangeLog.
>> note that I haven't yet had a chance to test it though.
> Hmm, maybe I misinterpreted "keeping the failure warning message".
I was not quite clear indeed!
echo "svn2cl failed to generate the ChangeLog. See
http://trac.networkupstools.org/projects/nut/timeline" > ChangeLog
Anyway, I dropped the "|| echo" portion (so if svn2cl fails, or is not
> found, the build fails), and tried to run "touch ChangeLog" for all but the
> Debian etch host (since that one generates web-accessible tarballs). The
> problem is that the build really happens twice - once to check and see if it
> builds in-place, then once to see if it builds from the tarball it is
> Here are the results:
> I'm not sure of an easy way to inject the dummy ChangeLog. Would it be too
> annoying to require svn2cl (or at least a placeholder script that does
> nothing)? Should I add an autoconf parameter for this?
hmm, I don't think that failing is necessary here.
putting the above msg into ChangeLog is fine. also echo'ing it would be a
the cherry for maintainability would be an "UP_TO_VERSION" param that get
the revision number, using something like:
svn log -v -q --stop-on-copy svn://svn.debian.org/nut/tags/v2.4.3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Nut-upsdev