Michael Welsh Duggan posted on Sun, 15 Dec 2013 22:40:55 -0500 as excerpted: > I built the new btrfs-progs 3.12 recently. I note that the version > information doesn't seem to match this: > > # ./btrfs --version Btrfs v0.20-rc1-358-g194aa4a I see Wang Shilong dealt with the snapshot issue; I'll tackle the version thing. There was a bit of a hiccup in the versioning with the 3.12 tarball, since the version policy had just changed with it, and (I gather) the tarball prep script hadn't been updated appropriately. I believe a patch has already been applied to fix the problem (the patch was certainly posted on this list, but I haven't tracked whether it was actually applied yet) so the same problem won't happen the next time. Meanwhile, btrfs properly reports v3.12 here, but I pull and build from live-git, and the v3.12 tagged commit simply happened to still be current HEAD last I updated. That does explain why the problem with the tarball version wasn't discovered earlier, however, since people (including the devs) building from live-git saw the expected v3.12; it was apparently only the process of preparing and releasing the tarball that was affected by the version bug. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
