Windows RC rebuild needed

Gregory Szorc gregory.szorc at gmail.com
Fri Jan 24 23:31:55 EST 2020


On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 7:59 PM Matt Harbison <mharbison72 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 10:27 PM Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I just grafted to stable because the patch should be there for people
>> wanting to use the in-repo packaging code. I actually produced the rc0
>> installers from an unpublished changeset including the configparser patch.
>>
>> There are also issues with the packaging code when encountering rcN
>> version strings. I'll send another patch or two to stable to make that just
>> work so that the building and releasing of release candidate releases
>> doesn't require manual muckery. You should be able to run a one-liner for
>> it all to "just work."
>>
>
> I'm able to build both locally with this graft, and they look OK at first
> glance.  Minor detail things I see (and IDK if these matter much in
> practice):
>
>   - The MSI version when you right click > Properties > Details, say 5.3.3
>   - The Inno version in the same area is 0.0.0.0
>   - The MSI that I just uninstalled claimed to be 5.3.7 (This was built
> before rc1 was labeled)
>   - The filenames are mercurial-5.3.3-x64.msi vs
> Mercurial-5.3rc1+3-624fe53ce1e7+20200124-x64.exe for this build on a dirty
> wdir
>

The WiX/MSI version normalization code was pretty buggy. I'll have a patch
set up shortly to fix this.

The Inno version string being 0.0.0.0 is a new bug to me. Unsure if that is
a regression or long-time bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20200124/e9412363/attachment.html>


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list