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 <dexuan....@intel.com> > >>> > >>> 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 _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
