[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH lp-metadata 2/3] livepatch: Handle arbitrary size names with the list operation
> On 15 Aug 2019, at 16:58, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Lars, > > On 15/08/2019 16:46, Lars Kurth wrote: >>> On 15 Aug 2019, at 16:33, Lars Kurth <lars.kurth.xen@xxxxxxxxx >>> <mailto:lars.kurth.xen@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 15 Aug 2019, at 16:19, Wieczorkiewicz, Pawel <wipawel@xxxxxxxxx >>>> <mailto:wipawel@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Lars, Julien, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the pointers, I will read them up and follow the >>>> recommendations with my future contributions. >>>> Sorry for the mess… >>> >>> It's not really a mess: it must have been quite a pain to put the mails >>> together manually >>> And it would become more painful for a second revision >>> I have been through this myself >>> >>>> But, let me ask first before reading the wikis, how do you prefer >>>> submitting series that contain patches belonging to 2 distinct repos (e.g. >>>> xen and livepatch-build-tools)? >>> >>> That's a good question and a very rare use-case. We split them, as all the >>> tools such as git format-patch only work on one repo >>> Applying patches also only works on a per repo basis >>> >>> So, I would send two series. But mention the relationship in the cover >>> letter (and/or patch if it is a single one) >>> >>> The tools in the docs currently may not work on livepatch-build-tools.git >>> * First: there is no MAINTAINERS file in livepatch-build-tools.git, which >>> really should be added >>> * Second: using xen.git:/scripts/add_maintainers.pl may not work when >>> called from within livepatch-build-tools.git >>> >>> I am going to play with this and update the docs and if needed the tools >>> accordingly >>> You may have to improvise in the meantime: >>> * Step 1 & 3 will work: Step 2, option 1 will probably not (which means >>> until I have done this, you may have to follow option 2 and make sure that >>> the right people are CC'ed) >> I can confirm that Step 2 does not work without some tools changes to >> scripts/add_maintainers.pl when called from within a non-xen.git repo >> And >> git send-email --to xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> <mailto:xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --cc-cmd="../xen.git/scripts/get_maintainer.pl" --dry-run -1 >> errors with >> ../xen.git/scripts/get_maintainer.pl: The current directory does not appear >> to be a Xen source tree. >> I need to fix this. Hopefully get_maintainer.pl isn't too dependant on the >> actual Xen tree > > get_maintainer.pl relies on the current working directory to be the top of > tree. > > At the moment, it checks various file are present (see top_of_tree) but I > think it should be feasible to just relax it to just MAINTAINERS. > > The risk is a user may end up to call the wrong MAINTAINERS file if it messes > up the current working directory (i.e calling for Xen patches from > livepatch-tools). Not sure if this is a real concern though... > > Note that Linux has a similar check to ensure the user is on the right > directory (i.e I know, that's where we inherited that from. I suppose the issue is that the MAINTAINERS file format may be different in another tree and thus the tool may fall over. In any case: I have a patch which prints out a warning rather than abort I will send once I made corresponding change to get_maintainers.pl, which seems to have call locations to add_maintainers.pl hardcoded in it Lars _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |