From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43667) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1da1NA-0003vo-CQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:03:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1da1N6-0003Tb-El for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:03:44 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-x229.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c0c::229]:34342) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1da1N6-0003T6-8l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:03:40 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-x229.google.com with SMTP id 12so120461466wrb.1 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 08:03:40 -0700 (PDT) References: <20170724182751.18261-1-f4bug@amsat.org> <20170724182751.18261-36-f4bug@amsat.org> <87lgncehbq.fsf@linaro.org> <5effed07-96c1-ae79-32a5-46b75516bf21@amsat.org> From: Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= In-reply-to: <5effed07-96c1-ae79-32a5-46b75516bf21@amsat.org> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 16:03:37 +0100 Message-ID: <87eft4eeye.fsf@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH for 2.10 35/35] script to run docker image List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= Cc: Eric Blake , =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau , Fam Zheng , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-trivial@nongnu.org Philippe Mathieu-Daudé writes: >> This isn't appropriate for 2.10 now we are feature frozen. That said I > > Surely. From the cover: > > "... provided at the end of this series as RFC for people wanted > to give a try (also include 'dockershell' script and a fix in > ./configure). These RFC patches (33-35) are not expected to enter > 2.10." My mistake - I hadn't gone over the cover letter. I would usually expect a series with [PATCH for 2.10] just to contain stuff being considered for the immediate future. > > Peter also commented on the "./configure" patch, so I probably > mis-titled "RFC" those patch > > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-07/msg07584.html: > "I prefixed this patch 'RFC' to not consider it but provide it > if someone wanted to reproduce the analysis. Maybe I should prefix it > 'XXX' next time or 'NOT FOR MERGE'." > > better "NOT FOR REVIEW" or "!RFC"? :p Better to post a logically separate series. It's fine to make an in-flight series a pre-requisite though (not that I think you need it here). >> have pondered a helper script for this sort of thing before. As it stand >> I just rely on my shell to remember the correct invocation for me. >> >> This is the sort of functionality we would need for maybe cross >> compiling tests using docker. > > This script is way incomplete and far being finished. > > Regards, > > Phil. -- Alex Bennée