Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Simon,
> >
> > In message you wrote:
> >> > I have started on it - I've ported over the Kbuild infrastructure into
> >> > a dedicated 'kbuild' makefile which is called from the main makefile.
>
Hi Wolfgang,
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> > I have started on it - I've ported over the Kbuild infrastructure into a
>> > dedicated 'kbuild' makefile which is called from the main makefile. This
>> > make modifications
Dear Simon,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > I have started on it - I've ported over the Kbuild infrastructure into a
> > dedicated 'kbuild' makefile which is called from the main makefile. This
> > make modifications to the existing makefile very minimal
> >
> > Now it's just a case of building all
Hi Graeme,
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Kim & Marek,
>
> On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Dear Kim Phillips,
>>
>>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>>>
>>> Detlev Zundel wrote:
as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM201
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:16:12AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Running a full MAKEALL for all architectures and boards, for all
> > (> 40) repositories, every 24 hours, requires more CPU and I/O cycles
> > that we can currently afford.
>
> MAKEALL is indeed con
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:16:12AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
[snip]
> Running a full MAKEALL for all architectures and boards, for all
> (> 40) repositories, every 24 hours, requires more CPU and I/O cycles
> that we can currently afford.
MAKEALL is indeed consuming. But I wanted to follow up
On 07/23/2012 04:06 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
Dear Eric Nelson,
Yea ... I think our community is kinda broken :-(
Hey. We heard that...
Careful what you say on an open mic!
Oh man ... I guess it sounded bad indeed, I should have though about the wording
more, sorry.
I mean, we messed up the
Dear Eric Nelson,
> > Yea ... I think our community is kinda broken :-(
>
> Hey. We heard that...
>
> Careful what you say on an open mic!
Oh man ... I guess it sounded bad indeed, I should have though about the
wording
more, sorry.
I mean, we messed up the management (and I wonder who'll st
Dear Tom Rini,
> On 07/23/2012 11:11 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Tom Rini,
> >
> >> On 07/23/2012 10:17 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> Dear Tom Rini,
> >>>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Tom Rini,
> >
> >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:20:15AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Marek Vasut,
> >
> > In message <201207230347.31993.ma...@denx.de> you wrote:
> > > > Yes, I know. Hmmm, maybe if every 24 hours the auto build
infrastructure:
> > > > - Runs a MAKEALL on the mainline repo
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 04:40:27PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > The other problem is how to find the boards that actually need rebuild on
> > per- patch basis. And for generic patches, we'll need to do MAKEALL
> > across all architectures anyway, which takes a bit
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:20:15AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Marek Vasut,
>
> In message <201207230347.31993.ma...@denx.de> you wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, I know. Hmmm, maybe if every 24 hours the auto build infrastructure:
> > > - Runs a MAKEALL on the mainline repo (if any patches have been
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 04:40:27PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
[snip]
> The other problem is how to find the boards that actually need rebuild on per-
> patch basis. And for generic patches, we'll need to do MAKEALL across all
> architectures anyway, which takes a bit of time.
I think we (custodia
On 07/23/2012 11:11 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
>
>> On 07/23/2012 10:17 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> Dear Tom Rini,
>>>
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
> On 07/23/2012 10:17 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Tom Rini,
> >
> >> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> Dear Tom Rini,
> >>>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > And Jenkins.
On 07/23/2012 10:17 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
[snip]
And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
to run test bui
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Tom Rini,
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > > And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
> > > > to run test bu
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 02:28:45PM +1000, Graeme Russ wrote:
[snip]
> I don't think a protracted 'tool x' doesn't do this and 'tool y' doesn't do
> that is going to get us anywhere.
Agreed, even if I did just reply to Marek :)
> What we need to do is define exactly what we want out of the patch
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
>
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
> > > to run test builds for U-Boot. I can tell you a
Marek wrote loads of stuff then wrote...
> But then, how shall we go about it? Any python gurus around?
I wouldn't class myself as a "guru" as that should be a title that is
bestowed on you by others but I know a fair amount of Python and might be
able to have a go at implementing some of this st
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
you wrote:
>
> What I am thinking is a patch tracker (not manager) which basically has an
> internal queue of unapplied (to mainline) patches. When a patch gets
> submitted, it will be sanity checked (checkpatch). If the sanity checks
> pass (or are overruled) then
Dear Marek Vasut,
In message <201207230347.31993.ma...@denx.de> you wrote:
>
> > Yes, I know. Hmmm, maybe if every 24 hours the auto build infrastructure:
> > - Runs a MAKEALL on the mainline repo (if any patches have been committed)
>
> Certainly ... it takes 16 hours to do so on my dedicated m
Dear Graeme,
In message
you wrote:
>
> Yes, I know. Hmmm, maybe if every 24 hours the auto build infrastructure:
> - Runs a MAKEALL on the mainline repo (if any patches have been committed)
> - Runs a MAKEALL after applying all patches meeting pre-determined
>conditions. For example:
>
Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Marek,
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Graeme Russ,
> >
> >> Yes - But see above. If the build infrastructure is building with all
> >> the repos applied we will get instant feedback that a repo is
> >> out-of-step with mainline rather th
Hi Marek,
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
>> Yes - But see above. If the build infrastructure is building with all the
>> repos applied we will get instant feedback that a repo is out-of-step with
>> mainline rather than waiting for Wolfgang to pull.
>
>
Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Marek,
>
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Graeme Russ,
> >
> >> Patchwork is GPL'd and, in my personal opinion, gets fairly close to
> >> what we might need. Maybe we could take Patchwork and modify it to suit
> >> our needs?
> >
> > Maybe
Hi Marek,
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
>> Patchwork is GPL'd and, in my personal opinion, gets fairly close to what
>> we might need. Maybe we could take Patchwork and modify it to suit our
>> needs?
>
> Maybe ... where're the sources?
git clone git:
Dear Graeme Russ,
[...]
> >> Maybe it's time to seriously look at a gerrit + jenkins based solution?
> >
> > I am not sure that gerrit will solve any of the problems we have.
> > I may be missing it, but for example I don't see any integration into
> > a mostly e-mail based work flow. From what
Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Scott,
>
> On 07/21/2012 07:40 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On 07/20/2012 04:34 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> >> Hi Kim & Marek,
> >>
> >> On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> Dear Kim Phillips,
> >>>
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>
> Detlev Zun
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > > Currently the lack of any reaction whatsoever was identified to be a
> > > very discouraging sign for contributors. One thing we could do is to
> > > declare a "soft" time-limit (two weeks) that patches need to be looked
> >
Hi All,
On 07/21/2012 11:27 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
>>> to run test builds for U-Boot. I can tell you a thing or two about
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
> > to run test builds for U-Boot. I can tell you a thing or two about
> > it, and Marek has his own story to tell about his exp
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
[snip]
> And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
> to run test builds for U-Boot. I can tell you a thing or two about
> it, and Marek has his own story to tell about his experiences when he
> added to the
Hi Scott,
On 07/21/2012 07:40 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/20/2012 04:34 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Kim & Marek,
>>
>> On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> Dear Kim Phillips,
>>>
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
Detlev Zundel wrote:
> as promised, here are my exp
On 07/20/2012 04:34 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Kim & Marek,
>
> On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Dear Kim Phillips,
>>
>>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>>>
>>> Detlev Zundel wrote:
as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
last week. It
Hi Kim & Marek,
On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Kim Phillips,
>
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>>
>> Detlev Zundel wrote:
>>> as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
>>> last week. It was a pleasure to get some core developers into one ro
Dear Kim Phillips,
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>
> Detlev Zundel wrote:
> > as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
> > last week. It was a pleasure to get some core developers into one room
>
> Any word on Kconfig support?
>
> Kim
I was digging in it
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
Detlev Zundel wrote:
> as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
> last week. It was a pleasure to get some core developers into one room
Any word on Kconfig support?
Kim
___
U-Boot ma
On Wednesday 18 July 2012 03:41:39 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Graeme Russ wrote:
> > Also, if one (and only one) maintainer is Cc'd on a patch, it would be
> > nice is it was automatically assigned to them. Same goes for tags in the
> > patch subject - there should be a way to automatically assign a fa
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Graeme,
>
> In message <5005562e.6070...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>>
>> I think U-Boot has reached the point that purely manual patch management is
>> not longer cutting the mustard.
>
> 100% agreed. The problem I see is that
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > Currently the lack of any reaction whatsoever was identified to be a
> > very discouraging sign for contributors. One thing we could do is to
> > declare a "soft" time-limit (two weeks) that patches need to be looked
> > at. After this time-limit,
Dear Graeme,
In message <5005562e.6070...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> I think U-Boot has reached the point that purely manual patch management is
> not longer cutting the mustard.
100% agreed. The problem I see is that we haven't found a tool that
provides the needed interfaces to deal with the a
On 07/17/2012 10:10 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>
> Maybe it's time to seriously look at a gerrit + jenkins based solution?
>
Here's a good demo video:
http://alblue.bandlem.com/2011/02/gerrit-git-review-with-jenkins-ci.html
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-B
Hi Stefan,
On 07/17/2012 08:37 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 July 2012 01:11:01 Graeme Russ wrote:
>>> It was discussed whether to do some "automatic" merging of these
>>> per-custodian trees into a central next, but majority of people believed
>>> that the patch handling process should
On Tuesday 17 July 2012 01:11:01 Graeme Russ wrote:
> > It was discussed whether to do some "automatic" merging of these
> > per-custodian trees into a central next, but majority of people believed
> > that the patch handling process should remain as unchanged as possible
> > in sync with the "prin
Hi Detlev,
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
>
> * Conflict resolution: setting up a moderator procedure for
> unhappy submitters
>
> A recent occurence on the mailing list where contributers were sent
> through multiple rounds of patch submissions for non-obvious reasons w
46 matches
Mail list logo
