On 11/13/2018 05:55 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 17:00:25 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > >> Weird, if I build directly from that tarball, then v4l2-compliance should say: >> >> v4l2-compliance SHA: not available, 64 bits >> >> So that's what I expect to see from buildroot as well. > > Indeed, that's strange, I see that the v4l2-compliance Makefile does: > > version.h: > @if git -C $(srcdir) rev-parse HEAD >/dev/null 2>&1; then \ > echo -n "#define SHA " >$@ ; \ > git -C $(srcdir) rev-parse HEAD >>$@ ; \ > else \ > touch $@ ; \ > fi > > which correctly uses $(srcdir), so it shouldn't go "up" the libv4l > build folder and pick up the latest Buildroot commit SHA1. I'll have a > quick look. I think it does, actually. If the tar archive is unpacked inside the checked-out buildroot git tree, then it will pick up the buildroot SHA. I fixed v4l-utils to be a bit smarter about this: https://git.linuxtv.org/v4l-utils.git/patch/?id=98b4c9f276a18535b5691e5f350f59ffbf5a9aa5 Regards, Hans
