Pkg xen devel - Dec 2020 - [PATCH 00/19] Fixing cross-compilation, some script work, revised

On 12/2/20 6:34 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> Hopefully this takes care of the comments which have been made.  Quite a
> few commit messages were adjusted.  Two scripting commits were broken
> into tiny pieces.
> 
> There are a number of small differences, but the end result will be the
> same.
> 
> Hopefully I've figured out the right set of flags for the way you
prefer
> patches being sent.
No. Use git send-email. You're still, even after asking many times, not
using git send-email.

git format-patch formats *patches*, not emails, even while they might
appear to look like emails.
>  Right level/type of threading, etc.  The dates may
> differ since Git uses the author date, NOT the commit date when sending
> messages.  These were mostly authored in July, those are the dates they
> get.  Since some were originally added in September, it gets that date
> header.  Your mailer might choose to sort them this way, which differs
> from sequence number.
Use git send-email.
> Elliott Mitchell (19):
>   debian/rules: Correct shim install step for current Xen
>   d/shuffle-binaries: Remove useless extra argument being passed in
>   d/shuffle-binaries: Make error detection/message overt
>   d/shuffle-binaries: Add quoting for potentially changeable variables
>   d/shuffle-binaries: Switch loop from for to while
>   d/shuffle-binaries: Fix binary shuffling script for cross-building
>   d/shuffle-binaries: Switch to POSIX shell, instead of Bash
>   d/shuffle-boot-files: The Great Quotification
>   d/shuffle-boot-files: Merge arguments together
>   d/shuffle-boot-files: Support filenames besides .gz
>   d/shuffle-boot-files: Rework version string handling
>   d/shuffle-boot-files: Simplify loop structure
>   d/shuffle-boot-files: Switch to POSIX shell, instead of Bash
>   debian/rules: Set CC/LD to enable cross-building
>   debian/rules: Setup use of noOCAML profile
>   Rework "debian/rules: Do not try to move EFI binaries on armhf"
>   debian/xen.init: Load xen_acpi_processor on boot
>   debian/scripts: Optimize runtime scripts
>   d/xendomains.init: Remove use of `xen` compat wrapper for `xl`
> 
>  debian/control                          |  5 +--
>  debian/rules                            | 34 ++++++++++++------
>  debian/scripts/xen-utils-wrapper        | 43 +++++++++++++++++++---
>  debian/scripts/xen-version              |  6 ++--
>  debian/shuffle-binaries                 | 48 +++++++++++++------------
>  debian/shuffle-boot-files               | 25 ++++++-------
>  debian/xen-utils-common.xen.init        |  1 +
>  debian/xen-utils-common.xendomains.init |  5 +++
>  8 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
>

On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 08:27:07PM +0100, Hans van Kranenburg
wrote:
> On 12/2/20 6:34 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > Hopefully this takes care of the comments which have been made.  Quite
a
> > few commit messages were adjusted.  Two scripting commits were broken
> > into tiny pieces.
> > 
> > There are a number of small differences, but the end result will be
the
> > same.
> > 
> > Hopefully I've figured out the right set of flags for the way you
prefer
> > patches being sent.
> 
> No. Use git send-email. You're still, even after asking many times, not
> using git send-email.
> 
> git format-patch formats *patches*, not emails, even while they might
> appear to look like emails.
According to `sendmail -t` they were valid e-mail.

Problem with `git send-email` is it is *required* to be present on a host
with 2 pieces of software/configuration.  It *must* have the entire git
repository.  It *must* be authorized to *directly* send e-mail for the
address.

The host on which I do development and has the appropriate repositories
doesn't handle this e-mail address.  As such `git send-email` is
*completely* incompatible with this setup.

I find your level of difficulty rather surprising.  The messages all have
[PATCH XX/YY] in their subject lines.  They apply fine if applied in the
order sent, quirks in application suggest a missing patch.  In this case
#05 was missed.  This seems odd since the archive
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-xen-devel/2020-December/date.html
shows them as having appeared in order and almost uninterrupted by other
messages.


-- 
(\___(\___(\______          --=> 8-) EHM <=--          ______/)___/)___/)
 \BS (    |         ehem+sigmsg at m5p.com  PGP 87145445         |    )   /
  \_CS\   |  _____  -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O-   _____  |   /  _/
8A19\___\_|_/58D2 7E3D DDF4 7BA6 <-PGP-> 41D1 B375 37D0 8714\_|_/___/5445