Hi -
> Would it be possible for gitsigur to support signing commits with ssh
> keys as well as gpg? Git supports this, and it's much easier for
> everybody than having to set up gpg. [...]
It would save some effort, but OTOH plenty of people have gpg keys
too, and the common desktop key agents
Hi, Joel -
> [...] Thinking more long term, I think there are talks about using
> a more comprehensive system for source and contribution management,
> similar to products such as GitLab or GitHub. [...]
(Yeah, but I wouldn't count on any of that in the medium term.)
> [...] That's why I tend
Hi -
> [...] I suggest that a basic principle for such a system is that it
> should be *easy* to obtain and maintain a local copy of the history
> of all pull requests. That includes all versions of a pull request,
> if it gets rebased, and all versions of comments, if the system
> allows
Hi, Joel -
As a part of more security review on sourceware, I had recently
experimented with systemd logind's KillUserProcesses=yes option. It
turns out that this nuked one aspect adacore hooks' post-receive
processing, which create a background process to slowly dribble out
emails.
I restored
Hi -
>This is very true, however a few words of caution: IME this is a
>maintainability nightmare. Fixing patches that forgot to regenerate,
>regenerating on rebase, confirming everything is up-to-date before
>merge, etc etc. It can be handled, I have, but it was painful and
>
Hi -
> In Autotools, `make dist` produces a tarball that contains many
> files not present in the source respoitory, it includes build system
> core files and this fact was used for the xz attack. In contrast,
> for newer build systems the "release tarball" is purely a snapshot
> of the source
Martin Jambor writes:
> [...] I have inherited Martin Liška's buildbot script that checks
> that all sorts of autotools generated files, mainly configure scripts,
> were re-generated correctly when appropriate. [...]
The gccadmin account on sourceware already does some daily routine git
Hi -
Hi -
> (CC Frank, the fedrawhide builder doesn't seem to include guality.exp,
> do you know why?)
Good question. The gcc.log testsuite file appears to be truncated as
it arrived into bunsen. The test does appear to be running on the
bot. Maybe the gcc's own dg* log processing scripts
Federico Iezzi via Gcc writes:
> [...]
> It seems like the GCC frontend/WAF have blacklisted the entire subnet
> used by Google Cloud for Internet access.
> [...]
> $ curl ifconfig.me
> 35.234.162.99
This has been unblocked. We sometimes must block large subnets when
abusive traffic comes from
Hi -
> [...] To be specific, gcc steering committee and glibc FSF stewards
> have announced the decision for their projects [...]
I may be missing something. All I've seen so far were some of the
leaders of some of the projects being joint signatories to a letter on
overseers@. As far as I'm
Hi -
> [...] Given that the current sourceware admins have decided to
> block migration of all sourceware assets to the LF IT [...]
If you're trying to say that projects have not unanimously shown
interest in moving infrastructure to LF IT, just say that. Don't
blame overseers.
If you're
Hi -
> [...] Where was a statement from key members of the GNU Toolchain
> projects -- the people who actually use the services and
> infrastructure on a day to day basis for their participation in the
> GNU Toolchain projects -- asking for an alternative proposal? When
> were they allowed to
Hi -
> [...] As for the rest, it really is a question on whether all of
> sourceware will in the end be migrated over to LF, it's for the
> remaining projects to decide. If we indeed have all projects on
> board [...]
"we" do not. That option was taken off the table weeks ago. For that
Hi -
> [...] so that we continue to have them involved in the technical
> direction of GNU toolchain infrastructure? [...]
"continue"? If the nature & degree of involvement we had so far in
the LF/GTI process is representative of the future, I'm not sure I can
in good faith ask anyone to fund
Hi -
> [...] Or alternatively, "sourceware overseers" could become a body
> that maintains sourceware and is able to get funding through SFC for
> its activities?
Great idea -- and this is roughly what's happening. This "body"
consisting of key individuals has invited other folks interested in
Hi -
> > I'm afraid I don't understand then what the point of comparing to LLVM
> > with respect to competitiveness or freedom was. AIUI, infrastructure
> > is an enabler, not really a competitive differentiator.
>
> I suppose that's a difference in our perception then. I think of
>
Hi -
> > > I don't see a risk to freedom. The GNU toolchain is quite underfunded
> > > compared to llvm/clang and IMO it's a major risk to maintain status quo on
> > > that front. The GTI opens new avenues for funding aspects of the GNU
> > > toolchain without affecting its core governance.
> >
Hi -
> > > [...] I think the LF proposal is the best long term way forward for
> > > the GNU toolchain projects to remain competitive *and* Free. [...]
> >
> > Can you elaborate what risks in terms of competitiveness or freedom
> > you foresee with the status quo? This is the first I recall
Hi -
> [...] I think the LF proposal is the best long term way forward for
> the GNU toolchain projects to remain competitive *and* Free. [...]
Can you elaborate what risks in terms of competitiveness or freedom
you foresee with the status quo? This is the first I recall hearing
of this
Hi -
> 12K 0004-gccrs-Add-link-cases-testsuite.patch
> 356K0005-gccrs-Add-general-compilation-test-cases.patch
> 132K0006-gccrs-Add-execution-test-cases.patch
> 4.0K0007-gccrs-Add-gcc-check-target-check-rust.patch
> 656K
Hi -
> 12K 0004-gccrs-Add-link-cases-testsuite.patch
> 356K0005-gccrs-Add-general-compilation-test-cases.patch
> 132K0006-gccrs-Add-execution-test-cases.patch
> 4.0K0007-gccrs-Add-gcc-check-target-check-rust.patch
> 656K
Hi -
> > The gccadmin team can do this kind of thing without overseer/root
> > privileges, or indeed so can any local shell-privileged user.
>
> Yeah, I said I didn't want to install it that way without overseer
> approval, as pip won't keep the packages up to date the way dnf
> installations
Hi -
> CCing overseers and Frank.
> Can you please help me with that?
> > Can please a maintainer install the package from pip?
> > Something like:
> > virtualenv /home/gcc/venv && /home/gcc/venv/bin/pip install Sphinx
> > or a similar location?
The gccadmin team can do this kind of thing
Hi -
I made an experimental configuration change on sourceware/gcc.gnu.org
yesterday that had unforeseen effects on some mailing list
subscribers. We turned on VERP (variable envelope return paths) on
outgoing mail from mailman, in order to assist tracking mail delivery
problems. This changes
Hi -
> Does gnu.org has a bug bounty program or reporting bugs reward policy?
You are not talking to gnu.org, you are talking to gcc.gnu.org admins.
Maybe see webmast...@gnu.org.
I am not aware of any sort of bug bounty in either site.
- FChE
Hi -
> Not the issue of wasted resources including the list server processing
> and sending the messages intended to my address, bandwidth and all the
> network equipment involved on the way, and finally the local mail server
> receiving and dispatching the message to `procmail'. It all does
Hi -
> I think irker is broken for a different reason (freenode not allowing
> #glibc access from accounts not authenticated with NickServ; not sure if
> that's global configuration or specific to #glibc).
That's probably the +r mode flag on the channel. Nuke that.
- FChE
Hi -
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;a=heads;h=refs/users/marxin/heads
>
> Apparently such page does not list user branches.
I believe this is because of unusual gcc git conventions, where the
refs/heads/ and refs/users/heads/ directories are distinct. I believe
have gitweb
Hi -
> Would it be reasonable to have the mailing list split into more than
> one, that is at least the original covering the trunk, and then one
> or more for branches? [...]
(This matter is for the gcc community to decide. Overseers do not
control git/mailing list traffic policy.)
- FChE
Hi -
> ~/.ssh/known_hosts exists and ~/.ssh is rwx only by the owner.
> Everything works fine if I add my key by running ssh-add. What's
> not so great is the errors I get when I forget to do that: "agent
> refused operation?"
Yeah, there is something odd on your side. Maybe your ssh client is
Hi -
> git pull from the GCC and Glibc repos is failing for me with the error
> below. It worked fine last week and I haven't made any changes to my
> ssh keys.
And are you logging in from the same workstation with access to the same
set of ssh private keys?
> Is this a transient glitch or has
Hi -
> Would it be possible to provide this feature for the current archives,
> too? [...]
rsync now makes available the master .mbox files for every mailing
list hosted on sourceware:
rsync gcc.gnu.org::gcc-mbox
This includes historical ezmlm era files as well as the new.
- FChE
Hi -
> >I was thinking we might be able to trick pipermail (the web archiver
> >component) to simply name the message web urls after some function of
> >the message-id instead of the sequence number. Will give this a try
> >very shortly.
>
> I just want to go on record as saying that I think
Hi -
> Such a service is not currently available on sourceware, but it'd be
> possible to implement: as messages come in, you'd build a database
> mapping from the Message-ID header to "current Mailman's Pipermail URL".
I was thinking we might be able to trick pipermail (the web archiver
Hi -
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-February/232205.html
> Looking around, the last two months of gcc now have very small
> numbers, but e.g. on gcc-patches the mails have very high numbers like
> 545238.html. Can pipermail provide stable URLs at all? We really
> need those, we
Hi -
> *Nothing* should touch changelog files :-) They should be generated from the
> VCS. IMHO of course.
IMHO: the VCS should be the changelog.
- FChE
Hi -
> > A re-subscription attempt to the gcc mailing list just
> > failed, expectedly I guess.
I see no sign in the logs of Olivier being banned in any form. Please
resubscribe online and forward complete failure symptoms if you
believe this is still happening.
- FChE
Hi -
> > A number of lists I'm on switched to our current style of minging a
> > year or two ago, because gmail users were not receiving mail, because
> > gmail was rejecting the mail.
>
> I find that unconvincing, because even googlegroup email lists don't
> mangle From: from sender domains
Hi -
> There's update SVN to GIT map file:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DMuFDu476stLdMxKSaDzv4c81rhMAGEI/view?usp=sharing
Updated.
- FChE
Hi -
> [...]
> I am fairly sure it breaks `git am' too, requiring a `From' override in
> the change description for author attribution in patch application to work
> reliably (I tend to work on my outbox when applying my own patches, so I
> avoid this issue, but I am sure the issue will hit
Hi -
Courtesy of a lovely httpd RewriteMap-basd hack courtesy of Martin, we
have all the svn r# redirects working, and faster than before.
- FChE
Hi -
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/r2000
> > > maps to a search and you get thousands of hits for SVN: r2000**
> >
> > The gcc git svn-rev alias handles that (and also handles release and other
> > branches) using approx.
> > git log --all --grep="From-SVN: r$rev\b" | head -n 1 | awk '{print $2}'
>
Hi -
> I believe we can quite easily customize mailman 2.1 to match our needs.
> The biggest challenge I see is a proper testing as I don't see it easy
> to set up a local mailman instance. I've got a patch that changes:
I suppose we can do some local RPM respins - as long as these changes
are
Hi -
> [...]
> On a related note, contribute.html has a link to
> https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc/trunk/contrib/check_GNU_style.sh?view=markup
> and gcc-4.8/changes.html has a linkto
> https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/libgfortran/libgfortran.h?content-type=text%2Fplainview=co
> which are broken
Hi -
> Thanks for working on this!!! However, I still see at least one issue
> in the following bugzilla entry:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94123#c4
>
> The first two git style links work, but the last one which points
> to the SVN revision doesn't. Is that a bug in
Hi -
> > since the change to the new list management, there has been
> > an uptick of spam getting through. Spam is bounced by my ISP,
> > and this just resulted in a warning that there were too many
> > bounces and that I would get removed from the list unless I
> > confirmed it (which I then
Hi -
Both svn: and ssh+svn: now work for your archeological needs.
Further, URLs such as
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279160=gcc=rev
https://gcc.gnu.org/r123456
are mapped to gitweb searches that try to locate the matching
From-SVN: rABCDEF commit. This way, historical URLs from bugzilla
Hi -
> N.B. the CC list has got too big and is causing posts to this thread
> to be held for moderator approval.
Ah, can cycle through the lists and raise that limit.
The default 10 is too low.
- FChE
Hi, Jim -
> [gerrit etc.]
Good points.
> [...] We need to think about setting up easier ways for people to
> submit patches, rather than trying to fix all of the MUAs and MTAs
> in the world.
Another related point. We are comingling email as a communication
medium AND a commit transport
Hi -
> > The From: header rewriting for DMARC participants is something sourceware
> > is doing now.
>
> Out of curiousity, is this rewriting you are talking about the cause for a
> lot of mails showing up as "From: GCC List" rather than their real senders?
> This has become very annoying
Hi -
> [...] You're talking about rewriting or adding headers (where the
> former is Real Bad, no matter what DMARC wants to impose), but the
> suggestion is based on not rewriting the body. If the body
> (including attachtments) is rewritten any way then that simply is a
> bug. [...]
We're
Hi -
> > The key here is to realize that the raw message is not what you get
> > back from the mailing list reflector, and also not the raw message
> > that was sent by the sender. In this day of mta intermediaries,
> > proxies, reflectors, it may be time to revisit that suggestion.
>
> But
Hi -
> > Are you trying to copy from the raw message representation?
>
> Everyone trying to work with a patch (instead of just the email) always
> is working with the raw message. Just patch < mbox or git-am mbox
> for example.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html says
> It is strongly
Hi -
> I noticed some emails reaching gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org use the following
> quoting:
> It's probably related to the following email tag:
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This is not something that the mailing list system does. This
content-transfer-encoding comes from the
Hi -
> I'm working on a script that will catch the missing email into
> Bugzilla that are triggered by git commits mentioning a PR.
> For that I would need the enablement of REST API that was enabled
> in previous bugzilla instance.
I believe this should work now. Thanks to Joseph Myers for
Hi -
> I'm working on a script that will catch the missing email into
> Bugzilla that are triggered by git commits mentioning a PR.
> For that I would need the enablement of REST API that was enabled
> in previous bugzilla instance.
Just for clarity, which REST API was this? Have a test URL we
56 matches
Mail list logo
