New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

luminous: cli/crushtools/build.t sometimes fails in jenkins' make check run #18398

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Oct 21, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@smithfarm
Contributor

smithfarm commented Oct 19, 2017

liewegas and others added some commits Jul 23, 2017

crush/CrushWrapper: fix output arg for find_{takes,roots}()
Signed-off-by: Sage Weil <sage@redhat.com>
(cherry picked from commit 60b9cfa)
crushtool: print error message to stderr not dout(1)
in hope to fix the mysterious test failure where cli/crushtool/build.t
prints nothing when error message is expected.

Fixes: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/21758
Signed-off-by: Kefu Chai <kchai@redhat.com>
(cherry picked from commit dc78d40)
@tchaikov

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tchaikov

tchaikov Oct 19, 2017

Contributor

@smithfarm i am not sure why we need to backport 6902627, as it is just a refactor. or am i missing something?

Contributor

tchaikov commented Oct 19, 2017

@smithfarm i am not sure why we need to backport 6902627, as it is just a refactor. or am i missing something?

@smithfarm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smithfarm

smithfarm Oct 19, 2017

Contributor

@tchaikov If it's not doing anything useful, I can drop it.

Contributor

smithfarm commented Oct 19, 2017

@tchaikov If it's not doing anything useful, I can drop it.

@smithfarm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smithfarm

smithfarm Oct 19, 2017

Contributor

@tchaikov Early in the cycle of a stable release, it's nice to backport commits like that, so their absence doesn't cause repeated cherry-pick conflicts later.

Contributor

smithfarm commented Oct 19, 2017

@tchaikov Early in the cycle of a stable release, it's nice to backport commits like that, so their absence doesn't cause repeated cherry-pick conflicts later.

@tchaikov

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tchaikov

tchaikov Oct 19, 2017

Contributor

@smithfarm makes sense! i have no objection to backporting it, just wanted to confirm with you.

Contributor

tchaikov commented Oct 19, 2017

@smithfarm makes sense! i have no objection to backporting it, just wanted to confirm with you.

@liewegas liewegas merged commit 87ab8d5 into ceph:luminous Oct 21, 2017

4 checks passed

Docs: build check OK - docs built
Details
Signed-off-by all commits in this PR are signed
Details
Unmodified Submodules submodules for project are unmodified
Details
make check make check succeeded
Details

@smithfarm smithfarm deleted the smithfarm:wip-21783-luminous branch Oct 21, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment