Build failed in Jenkins: NuttX-Nightly-Build #61

See Changes: -- [...truncated 506.09 KB...] Copy files Select CONFIG_HOST_LINUX=y Refreshing... Building NuttX... --

DNS Name Resolution Issue

Hello All, I am trying to test DNS Name resolution but observed issue of file opening fails while running. After debugging we have observed fails at following code: stream = fopen(CONFIG_NETDB_RESOLVCONF_PATH, "at"); in libs/libc/netdb/lib_dnsaddserver.c. We have analyzed the issue and observ

Re: committers-only files under sched/

There are a few people that have submitted ICLAs who are not committers.  I find three search through emails, but I thought there was another.

Re: committers-only files under sched/

Justin, Perfect, thanks. I updated the wiki page to call for ICLAs, and linked to the Apache one. Thanks for being patient and teaching me about this process. -adam On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:07 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > I am guessing (?) that everyone listed there has an Apache Softw

Re: committers-only files under sched/

Hi, > I am guessing (?) that everyone listed there has an Apache Software Grant > Agreement filed, or at > least is willing to file one. If we got SGAs from everyone on the list, one > step in the license clearing would be to find all the files

Re: committers-only files under sched/

Greg, Cool, thanks for the history. Very interesting and helpful to know. And thanks for pointing out the overloaded words. By "committer" I just meant the NuttX authors listed on this page: Who We Are — everyone there had "Committer" by their name so

Re: committers-only files under sched/

On 3/11/2020 3:15 PM, Gregory Nutt wrote: https://bitbucket.org/nuttx/nuttx/addon/bitbucket-graphs/graphs-repo-page#!graph=contributors&uuid=4430abf9-a782-49ff-bd16-bc1df696048e&type=c&group=weeks Now you can correctly see that I have 19,450 commits as Gregory Nutt after around 2013 but ano

Re: committers-only files under sched/

https://bitbucket.org/nuttx/nuttx/addon/bitbucket-graphs/graphs-repo-page#!graph=contributors&uuid=4430abf9-a782-49ff-bd16-bc1df696048e&type=c&group=weeks Now you can correctly see that I have 19,450 commits as Gregory Nutt after around 2013 but another 11,173 commits as patacongo prior to t

Re: committers-only files under sched/

Brennan pointed out I forgot to include --follow in the git log command to catch older revisions of files if they have been renamed. I updated the authors.sh script. Here are new stats for c files under sched/: * 285 total files * 114 files have only commits from committers * 171 files

Re: committers-only files under sched/

Brennan pointed out I forgot to include --follow in the git log command to catch older revisions of files if they have been renamed. I updated the authors.sh script. Here are new stats for c files under sched/: - 285 total files - 114 files have only commits from committers - 171 files ha

committers-only files under sched/

Brennan, I wrote a couple of bash script tools to analyze committers. Under the sched/ directory there are: - 285 total c files (*.c and *.h) - 130 files have only commits from committers - 155 files have commits from a mix of committers and non-committers I'm enclosing a list of files.

license clearing next steps

A bunch of discussion on how to go about license clearing occurred on this GitHub issue . I tried to summarize it here: License Clearing wiki page I tried to write a process th

fossology working

Brennan, What you did worked, I was able to update my account and can browse and run reports now. cheers adam -- Adam Feuer

RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?

See inline -Original Message- From: Xiang Xiao [mailto:xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 8:11 AM To: dev@nuttx.apache.org Subject: Re: Should we relax precheck a little bit? It isn't good to change the licenses in one patch because: 1.We need review all licenses c

Re: Should we relax precheck a little bit?

It isn't good to change the licenses in one patch because: 1.We need review all licenses change more carefully, mixing style change make all reviewer lose the focus. 2.People outside the team may need recheck the licenses change to enuse no any IP pollution. 3.We need find a way to revert the licen

Re: Should we relax precheck a little bit?

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:43 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) wrote: > > A possible rule is to not make new nxstyle issues. > You can run nxstyle twice, before the patch and after the patch, and check > the difference to see if there are new violations. > > It may not be accurate but basiclly works, and committer

Re: Should we relax precheck a little bit?

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 8:13 AM David Sidrane wrote: > First, I have to say that I value the NuttX coding standard - it make for > the most readable code I have EVERY worked on. I want it preserved. > > But in light of the below discussion: I am changing my position that the > "rule" CI is to ju

RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?

First, I have to say that I value the NuttX coding standard - it make for the most readable code I have EVERY worked on. I want it preserved. But in light of the below discussion: I am changing my position that the "rule" CI is to just check ONLY the changes to a file AND if the only CI failure i

Re: Should we relax precheck a little bit?

A possible rule is to not make new nxstyle issues. You can run nxstyle twice, before the patch and after the patch, and check the difference to see if there are new violations. It may not be accurate but basiclly works, and committers do not need to check it manually to find out whether the patch

Re: Should we relax precheck a little bit?

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 2:49 PM Takashi Yamamoto wrote: > > we basically prevent changes on files unless you can fix all nxstyle > issues in them. > i don't think it's a good idea. > > i believe that there can be changes more important than style fixes. > in addition to -r option you suggested, >