Re: [PATCH] Revert "scripts/setlocalversion: git: Make -dirty check more robust"

[Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>]

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:07 PM Genki Sky <sky@genki.is> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 12:55:14 -0800, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
> > I do not think it is a good idea to create a random file in the .git directory
> > under any circumstance, and much less so if an output directory was specified,
> > no matter if the path is read-only or not. I also still think that it is a
> > bad idea to touch the source tree if an output directory was specified.
> > It defeats the purpose of specifying an output directory.
>
> I was thinking of touching a pre-existing file like .git/config or
> .git/description, which I was hoping would be harmless. But sounds
> like that's still not desired?
>
> Okay, I guess one approach is to only refresh the index if $objtree ==
> $srctree, by passing some flag to scripts/setlocalversion from
> scripts/package/Makefile. Is that what you're thinking? Feels a little
> strange, but it seems it'd satisfy everyone.

From reading the thread it sounds like Guenter was not even super
happy with that based on the principal that you wouldn't expect a
kernel build to be doing write operations in your .git directory even
if $objtree == $srctree


> > Ubuntu 16.04 ships with git version 2.7.4.
>
> Okay. I guess --no-optional-locks is a no-go then.

In theory you could wrap it.  If passing git with
"--no-optional-locks" doesn't work you could fall back to the old
code?  That would mean only people with newer git would get your new
feature and everyone else would stick with the pre-existing behavior.

It does seem like any things like this should be done atop Guenter's
revert.  AKA: revert first to get things working the way that they
were and then start talking about how to make it better.

-Doug