Hi, I just realized non of Patrik's commit mails has every reached llvm-commits. Neither my own archive nor the web interface contains commit messages for any of his commits. The relevant commits are 168785, 168516, 168507, 167924, 157381, 157323, 157320, 157319, 157184 Does anybody have any idea why those commit mails would get lost? Or did I just overlook something? Cheers Tobi
Hi, For what it's worth, I've also both "not received" a some email and been getting a _lot_ (5-6 within last month) of messages recently asking for "reactivation due to excessive bounces" related to the llvm & cfe commits lists. Now this _may_ be an issue in the systems after it's left the cs.uiuc.edu mailer, but FWIW the people in charge of monitoring the mail delivery deny anything has been happening within our systems. At the moment I don't know where the problem is. So I'll just report this in case people with other mail systems are experiencing similar issues, which might indicate a more central problem. Regards, Dave -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Tobias Grosser Sent: 28 November 2012 14:07 To: LLVM Development List; llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; patrik.h.hagglund at ericsson.com Subject: [LLVMdev] Lost commit mails Hi, I just realized non of Patrik's commit mails has every reached llvm-commits. Neither my own archive nor the web interface contains commit messages for any of his commits. The relevant commits are 168785, 168516, 168507, 167924, 157381, 157323, 157320, 157319, 157184 Does anybody have any idea why those commit mails would get lost? Or did I just overlook something? Cheers Tobi _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
Le 28 nov. 2012 à 15:07, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> a écrit :> Hi, > > I just realized non of Patrik's commit mails has every reached llvm-commits. Neither my own archive nor the web interface contains commit messages for any of his commits. The relevant commits are > > 168785, 168516, 168507, 167924, 157381, 157323, 157320, 157319, 157184 > > Does anybody have any idea why those commit mails would get lost? Or did I just overlook something? >IIRC, the last time we saw such behavior was because the committer email did not match the email he used to subscribe to the llvm-commits list. -- Jean-Daniel
On 11/28/2012 03:47 PM, Jean-Daniel Dupas wrote:> > Le 28 nov. 2012 à 15:07, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> a écrit : > >> Hi, >> >> I just realized non of Patrik's commit mails has every reached llvm-commits. Neither my own archive nor the web interface contains commit messages for any of his commits. The relevant commits are >> >> 168785, 168516, 168507, 167924, 157381, 157323, 157320, 157319, 157184 >> >> Does anybody have any idea why those commit mails would get lost? Or did I just overlook something? >> > > IIRC, the last time we saw such behavior was because the committer email did not match the email he used to subscribe to the llvm-commits list.Jean-Daniel, thanks for the pointer. @Patrik: would you mind to check if you are subscribed with your ericsson email address? It would be nice to see your commit mails. Tobi
On 28/11/12 16:25, ext David Tweed wrote:> Hi, > > For what it's worth, I've also both "not received" a some email and > been getting a _lot_ (5-6 within last month) of messages recently > asking for "reactivation due to excessive bounces" related to the > llvm& cfe commits lists. Now this _may_ be an issue in the systems > after it's left the cs.uiuc.edu mailer, but FWIW the people in charge > of monitoring the mail delivery deny anything has been happening > within our systems. At the moment I don't know where the problem is. > So I'll just report this in case people with other mail systems are > experiencing similar issues, which might indicate a more central > problem.I've seen this too some half a dozen times over the past year. It was supposed to be fixed at the receiving end after the first notification, yet it kept happening. I thought it was the high volume that kept confusing the anti-spam heuristics, but perhaps the problem is at UIUC end after all. kalle