Re: [BUG?] Wrong RC reported during 'make install'

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.02.2025 01:51, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 12/02/2025 9:52 pm, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >> On Wed, 12 Feb 2025, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> >>> Hello everyone,
> >>>
> >>> During the installation of Xen on an ARM server machine from the source 
> >>> code,
> >>> I found that the wrong release candidate (rc) is being used:
> >>>   $ make install  
> >>>     install -m0644 -p xen //boot/xen-4.20-rc  
> >>>     install: cannot remove ‘//boot/xen-4.20-rc’: Permission denied  
> >>>     make[1]: *** [Makefile:507: _install] Error 1
> >>> My expectation is that it should be xen-4.20-rc4.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure if this behavior is intentional or if users are expected to 
> >>> set
> >>> the XEN_VENDORVERSION variable manually to ensure the correct release
> >>> candidate number.
> >>>
> >>> In my opinion, we should set the proper release candidate number after
> >>> "xen-4.20-rc" automatically.
> >>>
> >>> Does anyone have any thoughts or suggestions on how to resolve this issue?
> >> Hi Oleksii,
> >>
> >> I did a quick test and I see exactly the same on x86 as well. This patch
> >> fixes it, but then it would need someone to update the RC number in
> >> xen/Makefile every time a new RC is made.
> >>
> >> ---
> >> xen: add RC version number to xen filename
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxx>
> > 
> > This is a direct consequence of the request to keep XEN_EXTRAVERSION at
> > "-rc" throughout the release cycle.
> > 
> > I'm having to manually edit that simply to create the tarballs
> > correctly, which in turn means that the tarball isn't a byte-for-byte
> > identical `git archive` of the tag it purports to be.
> 
> Just for my understanding - may I ask why this editing is necessary?
> Other release technicians never mentioned the (indeed undesirable)
> need to do so.

This is not an answer to Jan's question, more me highlighting
priorities.

While having the appropriate RC version in the Xen name during the RC
phase of the release process would be nice, I do not believe it is
mandatory. We do need it in the official release tarballs though.

So the most important consideration for me is making the release
technician's job easier and less error-prone. Therefore, I believe we
should follow Andrew and Julien's recommendation on this.

Andrew, just to be clear, are you recommending to go with a patch
similar to the one I posted, and then update the XEN_VENDORVERSION
with a new commit every time there is a new RC? Or are you suggesting
something else? I wasn't certain reading your reply.