Initial pass of libctru version checking in ctru-sys
#101
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ian-h-chamberlain
changed the title
libctru version checking in ctru-sys
AzureMarker
reviewed
Mar 19, 2023
Also bump doxgyen-rs to crates.io version, and mark bindings.rs as generated for Github.
Also simplify version checking logic a bit. It's just a warning, so we can check for exact version just to be safe and skip the major/minor comparisons for semver. Also update the README a bit to explain the versioning scheme.
Meziu
approved these changes
Mar 20, 2023
|
We should let people the have the choice to use an external |
That's a fair point. This change doesn't prevent anything like that, it would just display a warning that we couldn't determine the |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Partially addresses #100, but we'd probably want to do something as part of the CI release process as well.
This isn't set in stone, I'm just experimenting with some different things to see what makes sense. So far this seems to work pretty well, but I'm not sure if we want to encode the "duplicate" info with the
+metadata on the build version as well as with the major/minor scheme mentioned in #100Let me know what you think, I'll leave as a draft for now and we can discuss it.