Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use correct product version in SPC in servicing #110980

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

akoeplinger
Copy link
Member

@akoeplinger akoeplinger commented Dec 28, 2024

I noticed we missed to port the version changes from #108899 (review) to main. This does that so we embed the correct version number for FrameworkDescription into System.Private.CoreLib even during servicing when using the stabilized version.

I simplified the source generator to pass the InformationalVersion msbuild property into the compilation instead of using reflection on the generator assembly.

I noticed we missed to port the version changes from dotnet#108899 (review) to main.
This does that so we embed the correct version number into System.Private.CoreLib even during servicing.

I simplified the source generator to pass the ProductVersion msbuild property into the compilation instead of using reflection on the generator assembly.
@dotnet-issue-labeler dotnet-issue-labeler bot added the needs-area-label An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners label Dec 28, 2024
@akoeplinger akoeplinger added area-System.Runtime and removed needs-area-label An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners labels Dec 28, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

We now always have the stabilized product version.
@@ -196,17 +196,10 @@ public void VerifyFrameworkDescriptionContainsCorrectVersion()
return;

Assert.DoesNotContain("+", version); // no git hash
Assert.DoesNotContain("-", version); // no preview suffix
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It was possible to identify preview or private builds from the FrameworkDescription string before this change. This feature has been useful for diagnostics. Should this feature be preserved?

Copy link
Member Author

@akoeplinger akoeplinger Dec 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jkotas yeah, we seem to have other tests that make that assumption too so it was easier to restore that behavior.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants