From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 938811F751 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 03:20:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389845AbgDPDUj (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2020 23:20:39 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:53904 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388679AbgDPDUf (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2020 23:20:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE14866192; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 23:20:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=uoUN3qcslX0OnNtAAuFuDhi42H0=; b=kz13c5 pbdiJWUE+BuBz83csjY0thwKNtZU5FYCYbZAx8H9QugMnqOFefnr4X3UwluJ5cMY eyE8X8mYjJfAu0KZfi/t5lL9I3Q6N2YiYTMaxqaWGmy2Jrc7wU0neHYlkBuu+ttN mEIUIHtMLgLl3WAZXD3ob50NxJxm1+lV6M4kI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=b9lxOnbIdLzwKdanAL8DeC8HPrSagNV1 mS4Mlu+gbz3TEWcEml8s9kQHmuXHsqqjdc5dVIZks7hdK0uwG4J645nv3CVIbZW1 zgqDdBceaLfmPcOYYr+9rOBvxmHA4MG1nHmElgQHZnKx0KF7GcND4R8HjQQBKGI/ AG3CXWA0SQY= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5A1166191; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 23:20:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6537166190; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 23:20:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Emily Shaffer Cc: Danh Doan , Johannes Schindelin , Git List Subject: Re: fixing ci failure of 'pu' with the es/bugreport topic References: <20200410174141.GB27699@danh.dev> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 20:20:31 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Emily Shaffer's message of "Wed, 15 Apr 2020 18:55:31 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3AF4AF06-7F91-11EA-9F9C-D1361DBA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Emily Shaffer writes: > Hm, ok. I'll send a reroll squashing this in verbatim tomorrow unless > I hear otherwise from Dscho? Looks like it's indeed the first one > (dd763e). > I'm curious to know how I can check this build method for myself for next time. > > (If I misunderstood and I should send a reroll ASAP, please let me > know; otherwise I already switched off for the evening.) Nah, I do not think it is all that urgent. I'd rather wait until we hear positive "yup, that's the right way to do it" (or "no, you'd do it this way instead" guidance) to waste an extra round. Having said that, the topic won't touch 'next' with a known CI glitch whose fix ought to be straight-forward especially with help/nod from experts, and as far as I recall, there wasn't any other outstanding issues for this round, even though we may already have plans for possible follow-up enhancements, so let's not keep it hanging unnecessarily longer. Perhaps we'd all be happy if we can resolve it before the end of this week or early next week? Thanks.