On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:17:48PM +0800, Nazri Ramliy wrote:
> Sometimes I wanted to know how outdated git is on my system.
$ ls -la $(which git)
> Coming up with a script to parse "git --version" output to get the SHA1,
> and compare that to master's SHA1 seemed a little overkill compared to
> this:
>
> diff --git a/help.c b/help.c
> index 294337e..bc83491 100644
> --- a/help.c
> +++ b/help.c
> @@ -361,6 +361,9 @@ const char *help_unknown_cmd(const char *cmd)
>
> int cmd_version(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> {
> - printf("git version %s\n", git_version_string);
> + printf("git version %s compiled %s %s\n",
> + git_version_string,
> + __DATE__,
> + __TIME__);
> return 0;
> }
>
> With this, git --version gives:
>
> git version 1.6.5.rc1.19.g8426.dirty compiled Sep 18 2009 12:03:29
>
> Thoughts?
For whatever it's worth, I would feel more comfortable if this
were guarded behind an option e.g. 'git version --date'.
I suspect that there are a fair number of scripts out there
parsing the output of 'git version'. 'git version' is not
plumbing but we still might want to avoid breaking them.
Is it better to say "compiled on $date" or "compiled $date"?
It's meant to be informational (aka not an actual English
sentence) so I guess it could go either way; "compiled on"
is a little more proper, though.
What about "born on $date" since it gives users a subliminal
suggestion that they should consider upgrading to a fresh git?
;)
--
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html