| 5 Sep 2024 |
 outfoxxed | I'm proposing hashing the tag and application path together | 08:27:35 |
 K900 | And we could drop that | 08:27:38 |
| outfoxxed | yes | 08:27:42 |
| K900 | We don't need to though | 08:27:44 |
| K900 | We can just hash the store path | 08:27:48 |
| outfoxxed | what I mean is i think we can drop that anyway | 08:27:54 |
| K900 | How do we set the tag then? | 08:28:03 |
| K900 | Or can we just write that file | 08:28:06 |
| outfoxxed | you can just write the file | 08:28:12 |
| K900 | Oh | 08:28:14 |
| outfoxxed | check the cmake file the patch is on, the logic is there | 08:28:25 |
| outfoxxed | in the tarballs there should just be a .tag file in the root | 08:28:34 |
| K900 | My brain just ignores cmake unless forced to | 08:28:37 |
| K900 | But yeah that works | 08:28:42 |
| outfoxxed | i don't think we should even need to set it though | 08:29:00 |
| K900 | But also I'm thinking just hashing the store path might be weird for like locally built things | 08:29:02 |
| K900 | We should because we could have a different build of the same Qt version | 08:29:24 |
| K900 | With a different struct layout | 08:29:30 |
| K900 | That's not guaranteed to be consistent across ABIs etc | 08:29:43 |
| outfoxxed | but there shouldnt be a different struct layout with the same qt version | 08:29:44 |
| outfoxxed | 
Download image.png | 08:30:01 |
| outfoxxed | tag is the full git hash | 08:30:03 |
| K900 | There can be if it's running like | 08:30:05 |
| K900 | aarch64 Qt in qemu-user | 08:30:11 |
| K900 | Or some nonsense | 08:30:12 |
| outfoxxed | uh
i guess technically? | 08:30:30 |
| K900 | Basically store path is 100% safe so I think we do store path | 08:30:31 |
| K900 | Unless there's strong reasons not to | 08:30:35 |
| K900 | Like OK we'll get the cache blown out once a staging cycle | 08:30:49 |
| outfoxxed | alright
lets drop the patch and just write .tag in preconfigure though | 08:30:51 |
