On Thu, 13 Jul 2017, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello John,
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 05:26:08PM +0200, John Kacur wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Jul 2017, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 02:44:59PM -0300, Marcelo Henrique Cerri wrote:
> > > > Since v4.11-rc1~18^2~76, kill_pid() is declared in
> > > > "linux/sched/signal.h" instead of in "linux/sched.h".
> > > >
> > > > Include the correct header file based on the kernel version to keep
> > > > it compatible with older kernels.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marcelo Henrique Cerri <marcelo.cerri@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > When talking on irc to Sebastian we thought it a better idea to just
> > > remove backfire. I patched if already in the past for the debian
> > > packaging to build on 2.6.32 and 3.6 which were the versions available
> > > in Debian back then. That also means that the patch in question here
> > > isn't sufficient to make backfire build on 4.11. In fact it doesn't
> > > compile since 2.6.39-rc1 when SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED was killed in
> > > d04fa5a3ba06 ("locking: Remove deprecated lock initializers").
> > >
> > > @John and Clark: Which branch do you want me to base a "remove bitrotten
> > > backfire" patch on? IMHO there is a bit of chaos there because the v1.1
> > > tag bases on v2.0 and has VERSION = 2.0 in Makefile. stable/v1.0
> > > bases on v1.0, while unstable/devel/v1.1.1 bases on v1.1 and v1.1.1
> > > seems to be its target version?
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > > Uwe
> >
> > Hmmn, I find the idea of backfire kinda neat, my first instinct is to
> > say, why can't we fix this? If something is broken in the devel version
> > too, that's okay with me, you can disable that part if you want to
> > ship the devel version.
>
> "neat" isn't IMHO enough to justify keeping that. If nobody is using it
> and even nobody notices that it doesn't compile on kernels released in
> the last 6 years ...
>
> > The naming chaos is my fault, it took my awhile to settle on naming
> > the devel version. However I wonder if something is wrong with your
> > local repo, because I thought I had cleaned that all up? I don't
> > see VERSION = 2.0 in the makefile for example.
>
> It's not my local repo:
>
> uwe@taurus:~$ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/rt-tests/rt-tests.gitCloning into 'rt-tests'...
> remote: Counting objects: 2917, done.
> remote: Total 2917 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
> Receiving objects: 100% (2917/2917), 739.04 KiB | 0 bytes/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (1898/1898), done.
> uwe@taurus:~$ cd rt-tests/
> uwe@taurus:~/rt-tests$ git show v1.1:Makefile | grep ^VERSION
> VERSION = 2.0
>
I fixed the above over a year ago
git show c8ce47ae170a
commit c8ce47ae170a2d6d1634ad948c56113ec8d64b64
Author: John Kacur <jkacur@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu Jun 23 12:19:05 2016 +0200
rt-tests: Makefile, change version to 1.1
Rethinking the naming scheme, so changing the development line from
2.0
to 1.1
Signed-off-by: John Kacur <jkacur@xxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index a54d82bd8964..d60282e05931 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-VERSION = 2.0
+VERSION = 1.1
CC?=$(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc
AR?=$(CROSS_COMPILE)ar
