On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote:
Dear Peter Tyser,
Timestamps are not suitable to provide this type of information. If you care about which code you are running, than make sure to use git.
I do, but the minor annoyance of having the exact same version string/time stamp for different code still exists for uncommited changes.
You must be doing something awfully wrong when you have uncommited changes in any form of software you're releasing.
I don't think he's wanting this as much for releases (which would be fine with the git id as you mentioned), but during the development process. It is very useful during development to have a timestamp which confirms that what you are running now is what you expect. There are various ways I have used this:
* Catch that I failed to copy the new image to my tftp directory * Confirm that I'm booting from the flash bank I just programmed * Helpful for figuring out which of the files in my tftp directory corresponds to what's running
Also, while I can see good arguments for not having a time stamp, having one that is not up-to-date seems totally useless. The stamp might not be updated for months, and thus provides only an indicator as to when the date was last updated.
Upshot: I endorse this patch's concept, and urge Peter to put in his (apparently underpaid) time to complete it. :)
Andy