search for: pull

Anthony, please pull the following changes since commit 6a4e17711442849bf2cc731ccddef5a2a2d92d29: ssh://xenbits.xen.org/home/...

Hi all, Now that we're on GitHub, we can discuss about pull-requests. I'd like to propose to enable pull-request on GitHub, as a first step as an experimental channel alongside the existing methods for contributing to LLVM. This would allow to find workflow issues and address them, and also LLVM contributors in general to start getting familiar with pul...

...nd a lot of headache. Others have explained this well, > so I'll mostly skip that. > I am not sure what « headache » your referring to at the moment. I particular dislike the assumed fork model; I work in patches, so that's > a ton of overhead process wise. > > Sorry but pull request and forks are strictly less overhead process wise, especially compared to working with patches. What you’re writing comes across to me as « not having switched to git yet ». This is also the reason why we need months of trial for everyone who hasn’t used it extensively before to be able to...

Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > Personally, I'd like us to drop the linear history requirement but I > know there's some strong opposition there. The main reason I'd like us > to accept non-linear history in conjunction with pull requests is that > it means that the commits that were tested (whether by the author or > by CI) still exist in the repository after the merge. If we > rebase+push like we do today or squash+merge as in this proposal, then > the information that a particular commit passed testing (or fa...

...for topics like "documentation for 2.7.5"? I think it helps to have the issues/PRs sorted into smaller, related lists, especially when some of them partially supersede others. > > I believe the following should have no major objections: > * https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/428 <https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/428> > * https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/427 <https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/427> > * https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/426 <https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/426> > * https://gi...

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 5:21 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Linus, > Just making sure nothing's wrong with this pull request. > If there's an issue, pls let me know! It was just pulled because I wasn't 100% sure I wanted the extra indirection. Oh well, pulled now. One question: - the arch/sh/ part of the pacth looks dubious. Why does it do that #define smp_store_mb(var, value) __smp_store_mb(...

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 5:21 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Linus, > Just making sure nothing's wrong with this pull request. > If there's an issue, pls let me know! It was just pulled because I wasn't 100% sure I wanted the extra indirection. Oh well, pulled now. One question: - the arch/sh/ part of the pacth looks dubious. Why does it do that #define smp_store_mb(var, value) __smp_store_mb(...

...tools/virtio/ringtest/README | 2 + > > tools/virtio/ringtest/run-on-all.sh | 24 ++ > > 13 files changed, 1148 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > How the heck did you generate that diffstat? The names should be > ordered, and are for me. > > Anyway, pulled. Just curious about how that thing happened. > > Linus That's because apparently diffstat obeys orderfile rules: [diff] renames = true orderfile = "/home/mst/.gitorderfile" $ cat .gitorderfile configure Makefile* *.json *.h *.c

...tools/virtio/ringtest/README | 2 + > > tools/virtio/ringtest/run-on-all.sh | 24 ++ > > 13 files changed, 1148 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > How the heck did you generate that diffstat? The names should be > ordered, and are for me. > > Anyway, pulled. Just curious about how that thing happened. > > Linus That's because apparently diffstat obeys orderfile rules: [diff] renames = true orderfile = "/home/mst/.gitorderfile" $ cat .gitorderfile configure Makefile* *.json *.h *.c

Hi, From what I gather, OpenLDAP on Centos 5.x pulls LDAP changes from central LDAP server to a secondary LDAP server. So in other words, you can have your second LDAP server pull the db based on either; type=refreshOnly which mean the pull interval will happen when ever you specify or; type=refreshAndPersist which mean after a pull, keep t...

Hi, It has been observed that rsync push mode is much slower when compared to pull (On Identical scenarios). Building/receiving file list takes almost same time. But data transfer is much slower, whose transfer ratios are ranging from 1:3 to 1:5. On pull operation data transfer speed is consistently around 3.5 MB/Sec and it reached 10 MB/Sec. However, on push the maximum it could...

Hi all Thanks for your attention. CTDB manages NICs with event scripts. Virtual IP attaches on a NIC as a secondary IP. When noticing the NIC down, CTDB will pull it up. Does any one know how to disable the action? I do not want CTDB pull any NIC up. Does the command 'ctdb disablescript 10.interface' has any unexpected effect? Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------...

...commits from clone A to/from clone B without > going through the parent git-svn repository.  Is that right?  I recall > having read something about that somewhere. Maybe sure on git-svn's branch (eg. master). "master" should never be pushed to "git-svn", but "git pull --rebase" should be done. Each clonee should do "git-svn dcommit" individually. (and it would be happier if you did "git pull --rebase llvm.org) Of course, other branches may be push/pull-ed among repos. It is git! > If this is a problem, it might be counterproductive to p...

...o/from clone B without >> going through the parent git-svn repository.  Is that right?  I recall >> having read something about that somewhere. > > Maybe sure on git-svn's branch (eg. master). > "master" should never be pushed to "git-svn", but "git pull --rebase" > should be done. Right. > Each clonee should do "git-svn dcommit" individually. > (and it would be happier if you did "git pull --rebase llvm.org) Yep. > Of course, other branches may be push/pull-ed among repos. It is git! Does this mean that clone B...

If eth0 holds virtual IP as its secondary IP and I bring down eth0 by command "ifdown eth0", CTDB will automatically pull eth0 up. Sometime it goes wrong. The virtual IP becomes primary IP, and origin primary IP turns into a secondary IP or just missing. If the origin primary IP is missing, I have to run "ifup eth0" though CTDB has pulled eth0 up. CTDB uses “ip link set eth0 up” to pull up a NIC. I suppose “...

Hi David, Any thoughts on either this pull request, or #129? https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/128 https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/pull/129 Also note the mention of the new Python module here: https://github.com/george2/python-nut2/tree/development - Charles Begin forwarded message: > From: george2 <notification...

I believe (and I believe it was James who pointed this out on IRC) that Phabricator pulls in all refs, and GitHub stores PR commits under refs/pull. On 5/30/19, 3:37 PM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Tom Stellard via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: On 05/30/2019 10:04 AM, Sachkov, Alexey via llvm-dev wrote:...

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016, at 15:08, James Aylett wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 08:17:05PM +0200, rsto at paranoia.at wrote: > > I'll notify you when the CJK pull request passes Travis. > > That's great, thanks! Alright, after lots of fiddling with .travis.yml I finally made the pull request build on Travis' trusty image: https://github.com/xapian/xapian/pull/114 I have kept ICU/pkg-config mandatory. Most probably that will have to change be...

The following includes vhost-net fixes - both in the experimental zero copy mode. Please pull for 3.1. Thanks!

The following includes vhost-net fixes - both in the experimental zero copy mode. Please pull for 3.1. Thanks!