0.2.8_beta4: release process and bugs

Help test release candidates for the next release
Post Reply
Walking Tree
Match Winner
Posts: 641
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 9:14 am

Post by Walking Tree »

I'd say this is the kind of problem epochs are made for. for example:

0.2.8.0 => 1:0.2.8.0-0
0.2.9_betaX => 1:0.2.8.99betaX-0
OR 1:0.2.8.99X-0
OR 1:0.2.8.99-0.2.9betaX-0
on the grid as ~free::zombie~
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

klax wrote:z-man: Could you explain me how the version is get with the generic build?
I'll try, but really everything you need to know is that the version is stored in the variable VERSION and builds should go to UPLOAD. Well, they don't even need to if you want to push them to aabeta or sf by hand.
The $(VERSIONTAG) target is responsible for setting VERSION, resp. for creating the file builds/.versionfile that contains the version and is included by the makefile. All it does for this is scan the contents of the tarballs directory for tarballs, take the latest one, and sed the version part out of it. It should work if you don't check out the armagetronad module besides the release module if you just drop a source tarball into tarballs.
If the armagetronad module is present, the $(SOURCETAG) target above $(VERSIONTAG) is responsible for creating a tarball. With the help of the copysrc script (the name is misleading, its function evolved from copying the sources), it does the "make dist" procedure (create empty directory, go there, call configure, do make dist) and moves the result in the tarballs directory.

The nasty part about all this is that make does not notice when files it is including are changed. That's why you get the "please rerun make" message. It required some hackery so you only get it once...
klax wrote:And also why there is always a RCx subdir?
I guess that was a brainfart. It is supposed to manage consecutive builds automatically and set the build number on RPMs, for example. But I never used it myself, so we should probably remove it and do everything directly in builds/bVERSION. I would not cry a tear.
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

Walking Tree wrote:I'd say this is the kind of problem epochs are made for.
No, this would be an abuse in my eyes. The epoch is for earth-shattering events, for example if you switch from date-tagged versions to version numbers. Naturally, your versions get smaller, so you have to increase the epoch ONCE to work around it.
Lucifer had dug up a document describing the intricate works of debian versions, I'll try to find it. There was something similar to the rpm release tag hackery we're using against the same problem.

Edit: found it. Here's the link:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy ... -f-Version
the debian_revision seems like the tool of choice. In the automated build, use ${COREVERSION} as upstream_version and ${RELEASETAG} as debian_revision. ${RELEASETAG} is constructed so that it increases in all sensible sorting schemes (even plain alphabetic with 0<1<2...) from alpha versions over betas and release candidates to the final release.
User avatar
Revan
Core Dumper
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 11:30 am
Location: War Zone.
Contact:

Post by Revan »

I can't acsess the alpha link! :|
America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, badass speed.
-Eleanor Roosevelt, 1936
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

Please be more specific.
User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer
Posts: 8640
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

The makefile wrote: g++ -I. -I.. -Os -Wno-long-long -I/usr/include/libxml2 -o armagetronad_main armagetronad_main-gFloor.o libtron.a libengine.a libnetwork.a libui.a librender.a libtools.a -lxml2 -lxml2 -lz -lpthread -lm -lpthread
Is it harmless?
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

Lucifer wrote:Is it harmless?
Yes, but odd nevertheless. I think it may be because we check for libxml2 twice. I'll make the second check NOP on success.
User avatar
joda.bot
Match Winner
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 11:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

BugFix Windows

Post by joda.bot »

Added to config_common.h:

Code: Select all


#define strcasecmp strcmpi

;) I hate all those functions/methods without a standard :)

The other bug fix for:
VC++ 7.1 Compiler wrote: "\project\armagetronad\armagetronad\src\engine\ePlayer.cpp(2887) : error C2593: 'operator &&' is ambiguous
could be 'built-in C++ operator&&(eTeam *, eTeam *)'
or 'built-in C++ operator&&(eTeam *, bool)'
or 'built-in C++ operator&&(bool, eTeam *)'
or 'built-in C++ operator&&(bool, bool)'
while trying to match the argument list '(tControlledPTR<T>, tControlledPTR<T>)' with [T=eTeam] and [T=eTeam]

Code: Select all

// register me in the given team (callable on the server)
void ePlayerNetID::SetTeam( eTeam* newTeam )
{
    //...
    SetTeamForce( newTeam );

    // announce the change
    if ( bool(nextTeam) && bool(currentTeam) )
    {
    //...
    }
}
Compiles fine... I'll attach a lag recording later... got quite some lag with 40msec connection :|
Last edited by joda.bot on Sun Dec 04, 2005 4:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lucifer
Project Developer
Posts: 8640
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: Republic of Texas
Contact:

Post by Lucifer »

I just noticed this in my other post:
Lucifer wrote:
The makefile wrote: g++ -I. -I.. -Os -Wno-long-long -I/usr/include/libxml2 -o armagetronad_main armagetronad_main-gFloor.o libtron.a libengine.a libnetwork.a libui.a librender.a libtools.a -lxml2 -lxml2 -lz -lpthread -lm -lpthread
Is it harmless?
Image

Be the devil's own, Lucifer's my name.
- Iron Maiden
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

Lucifer: yes, I get three of them. They come from various library settings we adopt from "XXX-config --libs". We could filter the redundant ones out, but the order of libraries is important and I don't want to mess things up.

Joda: fixed, thanks.
If the lag you're talking about was on the Fortress, don't bother. We have some network trouble at the institute sometimes, and that does not affect the displayed ping immediately.
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

Just in case the forum goes down before I can post this: I'm going to push up an after-beta release again, 0.2.8_beta4.2, today or tomorrow. It'll fix the voting bug, the crashes in Windows, and I guess I made the gcc build work on Windows 98. This is not going to be an "official" build, so don't rush building it for all platforms.
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

Done it. Beta4.2 builds for the usual platforms (Linux 32/64 bit, Windows) are available on Sourceforge and aabeta.
The VC8 build of the client does not work for Windows XP, and all it gives is the cryptic "Installation problem, please reinstall" message. Does anyone know what's up with that or where we may get more information on that?
Luke-Jr
Dr Z Level
Posts: 2246
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:03 pm
Location: IM: [email protected]

Post by Luke-Jr »

Can certain people stop putting the wrong version string? This is 0.2.8_beta4, not 0.2.8.0_beta4.
User avatar
joda.bot
Match Winner
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 11:00 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Post by joda.bot »

@luke: I'm sure it was more or less a typo by z-man(?). z-man really takes his time to fix and answer to problems, so let's just help him out as good as we can ? Just try to say something like "Hey, z-man, I just noticed that the version string is wrong. I guess it's just a typo." that is way better than
"can certain people" as you really know who has to be addressed.

@z-man: Sorry, if ur not the receiving end, then I got it all wrong ;)
User avatar
Z-Man
God & Project Admin
Posts: 11585
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Post by Z-Man »

I don't know who is the receiving end and I can't find the string 0.2.8.0_beta4.2 anywhere, not in the source, not on aabeta, not on SF, not in posts. Soo, yes, a bit of more specific information from Luke would be useful if he wants certain people to change :)
Post Reply