Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 15 Apr 2023 19:13:23 -0700
From:      Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com>
To:        Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD User <freebsd@walstatt-de.de>, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>, Charlie Li <vishwin@freebsd.org>, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org>, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org, Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75
Message-ID:  <3BB7D5DD-99A6-4D27-BBB6-4CD3294EEDF9@yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGudoHHnimmsgXTBjrcY=FiYnQCoh7m8zhBM4BPYHoFy%2BihUxQ@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <20230413071032.18BFF31F@slippy.cwsent.com> <D0D9BD06-C321-454C-A038-C55C63E0DD6B@dawidek.net> <20230413063321.60344b1f@cschubert.com> <CAGudoHG3rCx93gyJTmzTBnSe4fQ9=m4mBESWbKVWtAGRxen_4w@mail.gmail.com> <20230413135635.6B62F354@slippy.cwsent.com> <c41f9ed6-e557-9255-5a46-1a22d4b32d66@dawidek.net> <319a267e-3f76-3647-954a-02178c260cea@dawidek.net> <b60807e9-f393-6e6d-3336-042652ddd03c@freebsd.org> <441db213-2abb-b37e-e5b3-481ed3e00f96@dawidek.net> <5ce72375-90db-6d30-9f3b-a741c320b1bf@freebsd.org> <99382FF7-765C-455F-A082-C47DB4D5E2C1@yahoo.com> <32cad878-726c-4562-0971-20d5049c28ad@freebsd.org> <ABC9F3DB-289E-455E-AF43-B3C13525CB2C@yahoo.com> <20230415115452.08911bb7@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <20230415143625.99388387@slippy.cwsent.com> <20230415175218.777d0a97@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <CAGudoHHnimmsgXTBjrcY=FiYnQCoh7m8zhBM4BPYHoFy%2BihUxQ@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
A general question is all for this message.

So far no commit to FeeeBSD's main seems to be
analogous to the content of:

https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/14739/files

After my existing poudriere bulk test finishes,
should I avoid having the content of that change
in place for future testing? Vs.: Should I keep
using the content of that change?

(The question is prompted by the 2 recent commits
that I will update my test environment to be using,
in part by fetching and updating to a new head,
avoiding the "no dnode_next_offset change" status
that my existing test has.)

===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3BB7D5DD-99A6-4D27-BBB6-4CD3294EEDF9>