Unix install scripts aren't storing the build ID

VERIFIED FIXED

Status

P3
normal
VERIFIED FIXED
19 years ago
14 years ago

People

(Reporter: depman1, Assigned: granrosebugs)

Tracking

({platform-parity})

Trunk
x86
Linux
platform-parity

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Whiteboard: [rtm++] fix in hand, r=cls, a=leaf)

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Reporter)

Description

19 years ago
Linux build 2000101608-MN6.
1. Open up one of the installed scripts generated by build automation (e.g. 
install.js in xpcom.xpi).
2. Check addDirectory and addFile commands.
3. Look at the version string passed to them, particularly the build component 
(major.minor.release.build).
Result: 5.0.0.0000000000. no build ID in 3rd component.
Expected: 5.0.0.2000101608.
Question: Both Linux and Mac use version 5 instead of 6. Don't we want to use 6 
for the major component?
(Assignee)

Comment 1

19 years ago
punt to samir.  I have no idea how the install.js scripts are being generated
other than a vague thought that it's in deliver.pl.
Assignee: granrose → sgehani
Keywords: rtm

Comment 2

19 years ago
Pong.  Back to granrose.  You supply the build id to deliver.pl.
http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/xpinstall/packager/unix/deliver.pl#26
Assignee: sgehani → granrose
(Assignee)

Comment 3

19 years ago
doh!

looking at the automation, it's looking at mozilla/build/build_number which
apparently is no longer being used (and should probably be removed from the
tree).  pointed automation to use mozilla/config/build_number which does have
the correct build id in it.

one line change to the automation to look at the correct file.  I'll attach the
diff.

cls - can you review?
leaf - can you approve?
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Whiteboard: [rtm need info] fix in hand, waiting for r= a=
(Assignee)

Comment 4

19 years ago
Created attachment 17282 [details] [diff] [review]
get buildid from config/build_number, not build/build_number
(Assignee)

Comment 5

19 years ago
oh, and this patch is just to include the buildid.  I'm not touching the 5.0 vs
6.0 thing with a 10' pole.  That's for marketing and the installer team (and
whoever else wants to jump into the fray) to work out.

Comment 6

19 years ago
r=cls on the patch.  build/build_number is going away as soon as we can land bug
26798.

not sure i'm officially on the `a' list yet, but a=leaf
(Assignee)

Comment 8

19 years ago
PDT: how bout that rtm++?
Whiteboard: [rtm need info] fix in hand, waiting for r= a= → [rtm+] fix in hand, r=cls, a=leaf
(Reporter)

Comment 9

19 years ago
added pp to keyword (platform specific)
Keywords: pp
(Reporter)

Comment 10

19 years ago
Build ID is also 0000000000 for the registry version in initInstall().

Comment 11

19 years ago
PDT says rtm++, please land on branch ASAP.
Whiteboard: [rtm+] fix in hand, r=cls, a=leaf → [rtm++] fix in hand, r=cls, a=leaf
(Assignee)

Comment 12

19 years ago
fix checked in.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
(Assignee)

Comment 13

19 years ago
build id should start showing up correctly tomorrow.
(Reporter)

Comment 14

19 years ago
verified on Linux branch build 2000-10-19-09-MN6. On to the trunk build.
Keywords: vtrunk
(Reporter)

Comment 15

19 years ago
Verified on Linux trunk build 2000-10-19-08-MTrunk.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Keywords: vtrunk
Product: Browser → Seamonkey
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.