On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 04:31:46PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-11-30 15:26, Bruce Richardson: > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 04:09:47PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 2016-11-30 14:54, Ferruh Yigit: > > > > On 11/21/2016 10:43 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > > +stablefixes=$($selfdir/git-log-fixes.sh $range | sed '/(N\/A)$/d' | > > > > > cut -d' ' -f2) > > > > > > > > This breaks the "check-git-log.sh -N" usage, since "-N" is not a valid > > > > range for git-log-fixes.sh. > > > > Generates warning: > > > > .../scripts/git-log-fixes.sh: illegal option -- 6 > > > > usage: git-log-fixes.sh [-h] <git_range> > > > > > > Yes, good catch. > > > I'm trying to fix it by converting -N to HEAD~N.. > > > > > > if printf -- $range | grep -q '^-[0-9]\+' ; then > > > range="HEAD$(printf -- $range | sed 's,^-,~,').." > > > fi > > > > > > > > +# check CC:stable for fixes > > > > > +bad=$(for fix in $stablefixes ; do > > > > > + git log --format='%b' -1 $fix | grep -qi '^CC: *stable at > > > > > dpdk.org' || > > > > > + git log --format='\t%s' -1 $fix > > > > > +done) > > > > > +[ -z "$bad" ] || printf "Should CC: stable at dpdk.org\n$bad\n" > > > > > > > > This is good for developer, but since "CC: xx" tags removed when patch > > > > applied, this will generate warnings when run against existing history. > > > > > > I do not think it is a problem. > > > Who runs this tool against existing history? > > > > > > > Me for one. I prefer to run the script against the commits in the repo > > before I generate the patches, rather than manually hand-editing the > > patches afterward - or having to fix the repo and then regenerate them. > > Also, when I was maintaining the next-net tree, I used to use pwclient > > git-am > > to apply a patch, and then check-got-log.sh -1 to sanity check it once > > build checks had passed. > > I am not sure to understand. > You explain that you run the script for the commits you are going to send > or going to push. That's the normal usage. > In your cases you should have the CC: stable or you will have the warning. > Ah, yes, good point. Never mind.
/Bruce