I'm done regenerating onnv-gate. I've had to rollback to: 1416:48e679b0807a
I've done a comparison against /ws/onnv-gate to make sure there are no other discrepencies, and everything looks good. I intend on pushing to the external Hg onnv-gate this evening - so if you want to get a head start, you can go ahead and move your repository out of the way and clone it up to 48e679b0807a and when I replace onnv-gate, you can just pull -u into that. If you have an opensolaris.org repo that is a child of onnv-gate and you want it fixed, please drop me a note and let me know. (Cyril: I'll take care of the ppc crew gate for you) I'm also open to suggestions if people think there is a better way of accomplishing this :) cheers, steve On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 04:25:25AM -0800, Stephen Lau wrote: > The bridge failed last night on cindi's wad. Internally what happened > was that she did a putback on 11/3 that the bridge failed on. Danek > backed it out due to merge turds, and it was re-putback on 11/4. > > The original putback was what got pushed to the Hg onnv-gate, as > revision 3100. I've had to rollback && revert this, and I've re-bridged > her follow-on putback on 11/4 as revision 3100. > > So: anyone who has taken a child/cloned/updated their repositories are > now detached. Please do a 'hg rollback && revert' or when you do your > next update, you will probably grow a second head. > > Unfortunately, while I was debugging this; I noticed a discrepency in > usr/src/lib/fm/topo/libtopo/common/mod.c, specifically: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:onnv_external] 499$ diff > usr/src/lib/fm/topo/libtopo/common/mod.c > /ws/onnv-clone/usr/src/lib/fm/topo/libtopo/common/mod.c > 27c27 > < #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI" > --- > > #pragma ident "@(#)mod.c 1.2 06/02/11 SMI" > 144a145 > > (void) close(fd); > 149a151,152 > > if (fd >= 0) > > (void) close(fd); > > > It looks like the bridge failed somewhere in the past... most likely on > revision 1417 (the FMA amd64 putback). I think at this point I will > probably need to regenerate the onnv-gate, rolling back to at least > revision 1417 (if not altogether). > > I realise this causes an inconvenience - but hey... it's beta, right? > ;-) (Sorry, that's a crappy excuse, but an excuse nonetheless). I > don't know if I'll have time to do this this week since I'm OOTO; but if > not, then I will have it done the following week. > > And on a side note, I think a good sanity check to put in the bridge is > to have it diff the files against /ws/onnv-gate after each putback to > make sure there are no discrepencies. > > cheers, > steve > -- > stephen lau // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net > opensolaris // solaris kernel development > _______________________________________________ > tools-discuss mailing list > [email protected] -- stephen lau // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
