linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 278 bytes --]

Hi all,

With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
tree today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Arnaud Lacombe]

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
> I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
> tree today.
>
What about github ? gitorious ?

If you fork linus' tree on github, you should still be within the disk
usage limit. My linux-2.6-next.git bare tree mirror is about 303MB.

Thanks,
 - Arnaud

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
>> I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
>> tree today.
>>
> What about github ? gitorious ?
>
> If you fork linus' tree on github, you should still be within the disk
> usage limit. My linux-2.6-next.git bare tree mirror is about 303MB.

Well... that would be helpful if all of the trees that linux-next
pulls from are hosted somewhere other than kernel.org as well.  A lot
of them are not, which means you would get an incomplete linux-next
tree at best.  Probably better to just wait.

josh

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Arnaud Lacombe]

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
>>> I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
>>> tree today.
>>>
>> What about github ? gitorious ?
>>
>> If you fork linus' tree on github, you should still be within the disk
>> usage limit. My linux-2.6-next.git bare tree mirror is about 303MB.
>
> Well... that would be helpful if all of the trees that linux-next
> pulls from are hosted somewhere other than kernel.org as well.  A lot
> of them are not, which means you would get an incomplete linux-next
> tree at best.  Probably better to just wait.
>
That's just insane...

git is distributed, but still used centrally. Kernel development
should just not be impacted by such issues.

 - Arnaud

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Randy Dunlap]

On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 13:29:23 -0400 Arnaud Lacombe wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
> >>> I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
> >>> tree today.
> >>>
> >> What about github ? gitorious ?
> >>
> >> If you fork linus' tree on github, you should still be within the disk
> >> usage limit. My linux-2.6-next.git bare tree mirror is about 303MB.
> >
> > Well... that would be helpful if all of the trees that linux-next
> > pulls from are hosted somewhere other than kernel.org as well.  A lot
> > of them are not, which means you would get an incomplete linux-next
> > tree at best.  Probably better to just wait.
> >
> That's just insane...
> 
> git is distributed, but still used centrally. Kernel development
> should just not be impacted by such issues.

Key word is "should," but reality intervenes.

---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
>>>> I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
>>>> tree today.
>>>>
>>> What about github ? gitorious ?
>>>
>>> If you fork linus' tree on github, you should still be within the disk
>>> usage limit. My linux-2.6-next.git bare tree mirror is about 303MB.
>>
>> Well... that would be helpful if all of the trees that linux-next
>> pulls from are hosted somewhere other than kernel.org as well.  A lot
>> of them are not, which means you would get an incomplete linux-next
>> tree at best.  Probably better to just wait.
>>
> That's just insane...

It's insane for people to host their git trees for kernel work on kernel.org?

> git is distributed, but still used centrally. Kernel development
> should just not be impacted by such issues.

No... git is still used in a distributed fashion.  It's just that most
maintainers host the public trees that people pull from on kernel.org.
 Some have pushed public trees to github or elsewhere, but not all of
them.

josh

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Arnaud Lacombe]

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
>>>>> I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
>>>>> tree today.
>>>>>
>>>> What about github ? gitorious ?
>>>>
>>>> If you fork linus' tree on github, you should still be within the disk
>>>> usage limit. My linux-2.6-next.git bare tree mirror is about 303MB.
>>>
>>> Well... that would be helpful if all of the trees that linux-next
>>> pulls from are hosted somewhere other than kernel.org as well.  A lot
>>> of them are not, which means you would get an incomplete linux-next
>>> tree at best.  Probably better to just wait.
>>>
>> That's just insane...
>
> It's insane for people to host their git trees for kernel work on kernel.org?
>
Yes. It is looking for trouble by creating a wonderful single point of
failure. Which happened to have failed.

If I were to be really paranoid, I would no longer trust any code on
git.kernel.org unless all the current repository were to be destroyed,
and re-uploaded by their owner.

 - Arnaud

>> git is distributed, but still used centrally. Kernel development
>> should just not be impacted by such issues.
>
> No... git is still used in a distributed fashion.  It's just that most
> maintainers host the public trees that people pull from on kernel.org.
>  Some have pushed public trees to github or elsewhere, but not all of
> them.
>
> josh
>

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 631 bytes --]

Hi Arnaud,

On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 13:17:21 -0400 Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
> > I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
> > tree today.
> >
> What about github ? gitorious ?

I am restricted by my employer as to where I can publish the linux-next
tree.

Besides, I am having a nice restful time :-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em 06-09-2011 15:30, Arnaud Lacombe escreveu:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With master.kernel.org down, there is not much change from yesterday and
>>>>>> I cannot publish the resulting linux-next tree anyway, so there is no
>>>>>> tree today.
>>>>>>
>>>>> What about github ? gitorious ?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you fork linus' tree on github, you should still be within the disk
>>>>> usage limit. My linux-2.6-next.git bare tree mirror is about 303MB.
>>>>
>>>> Well... that would be helpful if all of the trees that linux-next
>>>> pulls from are hosted somewhere other than kernel.org as well.  A lot
>>>> of them are not, which means you would get an incomplete linux-next
>>>> tree at best.  Probably better to just wait.
>>>>
>>> That's just insane...
>>
>> It's insane for people to host their git trees for kernel work on kernel.org?
>>
> Yes. It is looking for trouble by creating a wonderful single point of
> failure. Which happened to have failed.

It seems that we need a backup plan. In my case, I could put the tree
for -next at infradead or at linuxtv, but that means to re-configure
everything at Stephen's side.

Does anyone have an ETA for hera to come back to live? If they're
planning to recover it into one or two days, then it is probably better
to wait. Otherwise, I think it would be wiser to move the repo to
some other place while they're preparing a new infrastructure.

> If I were to be really paranoid, I would no longer trust any code on
> git.kernel.org unless all the current repository were to be destroyed,
> and re-uploaded by their owner.

In any case, I'll just do a push -f after hera return, and do a 
git repack -A -d on my repository there, to remove any bad object
that might be inserted by someone's else.

> 
>  - Arnaud
> 
>>> git is distributed, but still used centrally. Kernel development
>>> should just not be impacted by such issues.
>>
>> No... git is still used in a distributed fashion.  It's just that most
>> maintainers host the public trees that people pull from on kernel.org.
>>  Some have pushed public trees to github or elsewhere, but not all of
>> them.
>>
>> josh
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 588 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 11:08:53 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> It seems that we need a backup plan. In my case, I could put the tree
> for -next at infradead or at linuxtv, but that means to re-configure
> everything at Stephen's side.

That is not a big issue at all.  If you wish to move your tree, just let
me know (preferably in a public manner to raise my confidence in its
provenance - I am a bit more paranoid, now :-)).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em 11-09-2011 01:19, Stephen Rothwell escreveu:
> Hi Mauro,
> 
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 11:08:53 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>>
>> It seems that we need a backup plan. In my case, I could put the tree
>> for -next at infradead or at linuxtv, but that means to re-configure
>> everything at Stephen's side.
> 
> That is not a big issue at all.  If you wish to move your tree, just let
> me know (preferably in a public manner to raise my confidence in its
> provenance - I am a bit more paranoid, now :-)).

Hi Stephen,

Please replace my media tree (v4l-dvb) by this one:
	git://linuxtv.org/mchehab/media-next.git

I'll set soon a new tree for my edac patches as well.

Thank you!
Mauro

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 437 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 22:54:12 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> Please replace my media tree (v4l-dvb) by this one:
> 	git://linuxtv.org/mchehab/media-next.git

I have switched to this from today.

> I'll set soon a new tree for my edac patches as well.

OK

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em 21-09-2011 23:23, Stephen Rothwell escreveu:
> Hi Mauro,
> 
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 22:54:12 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> Please replace my media tree (v4l-dvb) by this one:
>> 	git://linuxtv.org/mchehab/media-next.git
> 
> I have switched to this from today.

Thank you!

>> I'll set soon a new tree for my edac patches as well.
> 
> OK
> 

Ok, just set a git tree for the edac drivers I'm maintaining.
It is at:
	git://git.infradead.org/users/mchehab/edac.git

It replaces both my old i7core and edac trees.

Could you please replace it for the linux-next builds?

It contains the fix for the compilation error on i386, as reported by Randy.

Thanks!
Mauro

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 518 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 23:48:45 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> Ok, just set a git tree for the edac drivers I'm maintaining.
> It is at:
> 	git://git.infradead.org/users/mchehab/edac.git
> 
> It replaces both my old i7core and edac trees.

I will switch to this starting tomorrow.  It is called edac and I have
removed the i7core_edac and i7300_edac trees.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: no tree for Sept 6

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em 22-09-2011 11:26, Stephen Rothwell escreveu:
> Hi Mauro,
> 
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 23:48:45 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>>
>> Ok, just set a git tree for the edac drivers I'm maintaining.
>> It is at:
>> 	git://git.infradead.org/users/mchehab/edac.git
>>
>> It replaces both my old i7core and edac trees.
> 
> I will switch to this starting tomorrow.  It is called edac and I have
> removed the i7core_edac and i7300_edac trees.

OK!

Thank you!
Mauro