Oskari Saarenmaa <os@ohmu.fi> writes: > On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 02:06:26PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I can see some value in that kind of information, ie. knowing what >> patches a binary was built with, but this would only solve the >> problem for git checkouts. Even for a git checkout, the binaries >> won't be automatically updated unless you run "configure" again, >> which makes it pretty unreliable. >> >> -1 from me.
> I don't think we can solve the problem of finding local changes for all the > things people may do, but I'd guess it's pretty common to build postgresql > from a clean local git checkout and with this change at least some portion > of users would get some extra information.
I agree with Heikki that this is basically useless. Most of my builds are from git + uncommitted changes, so telling me what the top commit was has no notable value. Even if I always committed before building, the hash tags are only decipherable until I discard that branch.
I nearly always remember to set config's "prefix" to some directory name that describes the uncommitted changes which I am reviewing or testing. Also including into the directory name the git commit to which those changes were applied is awkward and easy to forgot to do--the kind of thing best done by software. (And if I've discarded the branch, that pretty much tells me what I need to know about the binary built from it--obsolete.)
