Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 19:57:26 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> To: Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> Cc: rgrimes@freebsd.org, Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable-11@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Release Engineering Team <re@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Mismerge at r330897 in stable/11, Audit report Message-ID: <201803290257.w2T2vR3v060502@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgnEr9fk-5ZVkyL2QNSbSxxwEQkdOt=%2BmZv2x5dih6qbhw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > On 28 March 2018 at 19:49, Rodney W. Grimes > <freebsd@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:17:20PM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote: > >> > On 28 March 2018 at 19:04, Rodney W. Grimes > >> > <freebsd@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > >> > >> On 28 March 2018 at 18:35, Rodney W. Grimes > >> > >> <freebsd@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > >> > >> >> >> Hi! > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> This part of the MFC is wrong: > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/stable/11/sys/sys/random.h?limit_changes=0&r1=330897&r2=330896&pathrev=330897 > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Can we try to identify exactly what rXXXXXX that is a merge of? > >> > >> > > >> > >> >> >> Could you please MFC back the other random related changes too? Some > >> > >> >> >> of them made by cem@. > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> On 3/14/18, Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> > >> >> >>> Author: eadler > >> > >> >> >>> Date: Wed Mar 14 03:19:51 2018 > >> > >> >> >>> New Revision: 330897 > >> > >> >> >>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/330897 > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> Log: > >> > >> >> >>> Partial merge of the SPDX changes > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> These changes are incomplete but are making it difficult > >> > >> >> >>> to determine what other changes can/should be merged. > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> No objections from: pfg > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> > Am I missing something? If this MFC was supposed to be of the SPDX > >> > >> >> > license tagging, why does it have any functional changes? > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > Especially changes to random(4)? > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> This was my failure. I only spot checked & compile-checked the diff > >> > >> >> since I expected all changes to be comments/SPDX. > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> However, I must have gotten carried away and included a few too many > >> > >> >> revisions. Unfortunately some people have already merged fixes to my > >> > >> >> failure and thus this can't be reverted as is without also reverting > >> > >> >> those fixes. > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> That said, I should do that since this commit message is utterly wrong. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > We do not have to revert r330897, with what follows I think > >> > >> > we can easily find the revisions to revert from stable/11. > >> > >> > ... > >> > >> > >> > >> While we don't have to revert it I'd rather do so than have bogus history. > >> > > > >> > > Reverting wont remove that history, thats a one way deal, > >> > > and I think if we revert the bogus merges with the wrong > >> > > history thats as good as its gona get. > >> > > > >> > >> > >> > >> >From a look it seems the following was also merged: > >> > >> r316370, r317095, r324394, and a few others. > >> > >> > >> > >> Is there a reason you don't want me to revert the changes? > >> > > > >> > > Repository churn is my main concern. > >> > > > >> > > It touches 6000+ files some of which have probably > >> > > been touched since. A very carefull pre commit > >> > > audit would need to be done. > >> > > > >> > > Then another commit to 6000+ files to put it back, > >> > > also needing a pre-commit audit. (Pretty easy now > >> > > that I have a filter.) > >> > > >> > I'm actually using the same filter you pasted above to verify that my > >> > changes are only reverting said files. That said, while I'd prefer to > >> > revert, I'll defer to others if they have a differing opinion. > >> > > >> > > >> > Note that I won't have access my dev box after tomorrow for about a week. > >> > > >> > >> IMHO, if you are going to be away for over a week while we're headed > >> directly into the 11.2 release cycle, revert the change. What you > >> committed is not what was intended, clearly, and the commit message does > >> not reflect what had happened (as you noted). > >> > >> Any disagreements on this decision should be directed to me specifically > >> in this case. > > > > Glen, > > I would rather not revert, as I believe that would cause more > > damages as people have already cleaned up some of the mis merge from > > this commit. I am pretty sure a revert would lead to a broken tree. > > > > In Eitans absence I am willing to take responsiblity to untangle > > the wrong bits and clean up stable/11. > > > > Ok? > > > > Eitan, > > Are you ok with that as well? > > Yes. I also thank everyone who has helped me get out of this mess. > > My current action plan: do nothing Well, you just reverted it before this discussion came to a concensus on that. Not sure what to do now. I guess we wait to see whats broken. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201803290257.w2T2vR3v060502>