On 23/08/2022 16:04, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > Hi Quentin, > > On 8/23/22 16:23, Quentin Monnet wrote: >> Wow, I'm two days late! > > ;-) > > [...] >>> >>> You could append the version here. Or maybe put a placeholder that the >>> script should fill with information from the makefile or >>> git-describe(1)? >> >> So if I understand correctly, running bpf_doc.py should currently >> produce the following string: >> >> .TH BPF-HELPERS 7 "" "Linux (5.19.0)" "" >> >> Is this what you expect? > > Almost. I expect: > > .TH BPF-HELPERS 7 "" "Linux 5.19.0" > > Notice the differences: > - No 5th empty field "". > - No parentheses in the version string. > > But since you're not in control of the last field, and it's just a bug > in rst2man, an empty 5th arg as you suggested is the best you can > provide. Agreed > I'll file the bug. > > As for the parentheses in the version, I wouldn't put them; I only put > them in the man-pages unreleased string, to make it clear that it's a > version, but in the final version I remove them. OK, I wasn't sure. Thanks for the details. > See: > > <https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/tree/lib/version.mk> > and > <https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/tree/lib/dist.mk#n33> > >> >> I can make the script call "make kernelversion" to produce the above. >> I'm not 100% convinced it should be the role of that script vs. when >> copying it (we risk having some inaccuracies, for example I generated >> the above from the bpf-next, so it doesn't really correspond to 5.19), >> but maybe it's easier that way and avoids adding another script in the >> middle of the generation so OK. > > I like it that way. Moreover, I'll always run this script from a > release tag from Linus' repo, so the version should match exactly the code. > > Anyway, and I think this affects many projects out there have the same > issue: > > The versioning should always be correct. git-describe(1) should be > preferred, or in absence of that, a generic (unreleased) string should > be used. Describing any commit after v5.18 and before v5.19-rc1 to be > '5.18.0' is plain wrong/misleading. The Makefile should probably > autogenerate that info from git-describe(1). See how the Linux > man-pages do it (in the links above you can see it) for example. It's not really about how to do it, more that I don't want to have a hard dependency on git for the script. I want it to run just as well when there's no Git repo around. But I can try to run "git describe" and fall back on the Makefile (or on an empty version) if the command fails. OK I'll prepare a new version, thanks for your help. Quentin
