From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [93.97.173.237] (helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QoyqC-0002vm-Oi for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:24:04 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p74EJdTu002598; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 15:19:39 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 02492-02; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 15:19:36 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p74EJYCq002592 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 4 Aug 2011 15:19:34 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Darren Hart In-Reply-To: <4E3AA0A9.8080004@linux.intel.com> References: <6def4624e63c8c7cf439dff32cb155dd2bba0ebe.1312265186.git.dexuan.cui@intel.com> <1312285430.2344.582.camel@rex> <4E38C941.30805@linux.intel.com> <1312459628.2344.738.camel@rex> <4E3AA0A9.8080004@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 15:19:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1312467554.2344.748.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] oe-init-build-env, scripts/oe-buildenv-internal: add error detecting for $BDIR X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 14:24:05 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 06:37 -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > On 08/04/2011 05:07 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 21:06 -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > >> > >> On 08/02/2011 04:43 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 14:08 +0800, Dexuan Cui wrote: > >>>> [YOCTO #671] > >>>> > >>>> "readlink -f" in Ubuntu 10.04 is buggy: it doesn't ignore a trailing / (e.g., > >>>> "readlink -f /tmp/non-existent-dir/" returns nothing, but according to > >>>> http://www.gnu.org/s/coreutils/manual/coreutils.pdf it should do that -- > >>>> hence we get bug 671. It seems Ubuntu 10.10 or even later Ubuntu 11.04, > >>>> and other Linux distributions(e.g., Open Suse 11.4) haven't such an issue. > >>>> > >>>> So I think we should detect this and ask Ubuntu 10.04 users to avoid supply > >>>> a path with trailing slash here. > >>>> > >>>> Moreever, I also add the detection of non-existent path, e.g., > >>>> source oe-init-build-env /non-existent-dir/build > >>>> can be detected and we'll print an error msg. > >>>> And, if we get errors in oe-buildenv-internal, we should stop the script > >>>> and shouldn't further run. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Dexuan Cui > >>> > >>> Merged to master, thanks. > >> > >> For a patch to address a relatively benign bug I thought the standard > >> procedure would be for it to await feedback for more than 5 hours. I was > >> hoping to have an opportunity to review this fix as I was working with > >> the team in root causing the bug. > > > > It is near impossible for me to tell who (if anyone) is working jointly > > on an issue or expecting to review a patch. All I see are the complaints > > when things don't merge promptly or something less than ideal merges too > > soon (i.e. I can't win) :(. > > > In this case I was trying to refer back to what I had understood to be > the norm (waiting for 24 hours) to allow for feedback. I know it wasn't > a hard rule, but I didn't see any degree of urgency with this patch. If > your process is different than my understanding, please correct my > thinking so I know what to expect going forward. If not, then the above > is just meant as a friendly reminder that I, at least, am operating > under the assumption that patches will have a 24 hour review window > unless there is a pressing need to merge them sooner. Fair comment, its a 24 hour guideline and I thought that patch was safe enough :/. I'll try and ensure I don't do that again. Cheers, Richard