Version in glibc

Matthew Burgess matthew at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed Nov 12 13:00:45 PST 2008


On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:50:05 -0600, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com> wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> Ken Moffat wrote:
>>
>>>  #define RELEASE "stable"
>>> -#define VERSION "2.8"
>>> +#define VERSION "2.8-20080929-LFS"
>>> [snip]
>>>  Is there any interest in doing something like this ?
>>
>> I like it except the -LFS. As we don't modify it one bit, why
>> add the LFS? It is a stock weekly tarball unmodified. I don't
>> think LFS is appropriate. JMHO.
> 
> It would be useful to identify the distro.  This could easily be done in a
> sed.

I'm inclined to agree with Randy here, in that as we don't modify the upstream sources at all, there's no need to 'LFS' in the version string.  That, to me, suggests that there's something LFS specific about the sources.  I'd think it would suggest the same to upstream as well, such that should an LFS user or developer provide them with a bug report containing that string, they may well direct users back to lfs-dev based on that assumption.

As for "identifying the distro", /etc/lfs-release was intended for that purpose.

Regards,

Matt.




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list