Ms. Megan Larko
2012-Jan-28 20:33 UTC
[Lustre-discuss] Lustre-discuss Digest, Vol 72, Issue 21
Greetings! Wow! Thank you Brian. That is *exactly* the sort of instruction I needed. I was under the erroneous assumption that the lower of the Bugzilla numbers would be the object of my search in the event of a duplicate bug. I never traced BZ 21681 as I thought it was the "duplicate" and that the trail would be in the "original". I appreciate the detailed info. Thanks for teaching me how to fish. megan On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 2:00 PM, <lustre-discuss-request at lists.lustre.org> wrote:> Send Lustre-discuss mailing list submissions to > ? ? ? ?lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > ? ? ? ?http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body ''help'' to > ? ? ? ?lustre-discuss-request at lists.lustre.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > ? ? ? ?lustre-discuss-owner at lists.lustre.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Lustre-discuss digest..." > > > Today''s Topics: > > ? 1. Re: landing of Lustre Bugzilla 19579 (Brian J. Murrell) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:23:53 -0500 > From: "Brian J. Murrell" <brian at whamcloud.com> > Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] landing of Lustre Bugzilla 19579 > To: lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org > Message-ID: <4F22F9C9.8080502 at whamcloud.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On 12-01-27 02:01 PM, Ms. Megan Larko wrote: >> Hello, > > Hi, > >> I have gone through the Lustre CHANGELOG for 1.8.x and I do not see >> where bug 19579 has been addressed. ? I see it being resolved, but in >> which version was the fix landed please? ? There are reasons why the >> customer may not be able to go to the latest and greatest 1.8.x >> version of Lustre. ?I am looking for documentation on what version >> addresses the message described in 19579. > > If you look at the resolution of bug 19579 it says that it was resolved > as a duplicate of bug 21681. ?From there I go to my clone of > git.whamcloud.com and make sure I am on branch b1_8. > > I then use git log to see everything that has been committed and search > for "b=21681" and it finds commit > df214dd2e53f58be1f8cacdecb2fec54871a120e. ?If I then use "git describe > --contains df214dd2e53f58be1f8cacdecb2fec54871a120e", it reports > v1_8_1_60~13 which I can interpret as having landed before v1_8_1_60 was > tagged, or in terms of which GA release, it would be in 1.8.2. > > Additionally bugzilla says that 21681 landed in 1.8.2 and if I check the > lustre/ChangeLog on my Whamcloud clone I can see that that bugzilla id > is indeed listed in the changelog under release 1.8.2. > > Cheers, > b. > > -- > Brian J. Murrell > Senior Software Engineer > Whamcloud, Inc. > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 262 bytes > Desc: OpenPGP digital signature > Url : http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss/attachments/20120127/f1da8678/attachment-0001.bin > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org > http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > > > End of Lustre-discuss Digest, Vol 72, Issue 21 > **********************************************