[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] patch option needs clarification



On 10/22/2012 01:36 PM, Laine Stump wrote:
On 10/22/2012 11:24 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
On 10/22/2012 09:26 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
I am pretty much complete creating a patch which changes how dnsmasq
is started by moving the command line parameters into a conf file.
This new file is placed into the same directory and the lease file.

The test for the command line arguments now checks the contents of
the conf-file and there is no longer any tests for the command line
parameters which are now two.

The first command line parameter is (naturally) --conf-file=<filename>.

The second parameter adds new functionality and is
--conf-dir=<directory>.  This directory is placed into the same
directory as the conf-file and the lease file.  The name of this
directory is "<net-name>.d". This was added to make testing/debugging
of new dnsmasq options easier since it no longer requires rebuilding
the binaries.  This is also useful for adding log-dhcp and/or
log-queries for a specific network.

Now the option question.  I can submit the patch assuming the my
previously submitted patch to add --interface to the command line has
been applied or I can assume that it has not been applied.  In either
case, the new code adds a interface=<dev-name> to the conf-file.

All development and testing was done with 0.10.2 libvirt src.rpm on
Fedora 17.

The patch will be submitted based on git.


I have checked and the patch applies clean to the v0.10.2-maint branch
but has problems with the top level.  Is providing the patch against
the v0.10.2-maint branch adequate or do you want it reworked (does not
look like a big deal) to the top level?
It's much simpler if it applies to the head of master.

Try doing this:

1) "git log" and grab the commit ID

2) git checkout master

3) git pull

4) git checkout -b newbranch (or whatever you want to call it)

5) git cherry-pick ${commit-id}

This may give you a clean merge (at which point you can just "git
send-email -1") or it may give some conflicts. These conflicts will be
marked in the source file with:


<<<<<<<<<
code on current branch
=========
conflicting code from cherry-picked patch
do a hand merge of the differences, then run "git commit". You should
now have a properly merged commit - do "make check && make syntax-check"
then git send-email -1.

OK, I believe I have something and will send it to the list shortly. I am not sure of the procedure you suggested.

I tried to cherry-pick my commit onto a branch of master ... way too many errors.

I tried to cherry-pick your commit onto a branch of v0.10.2-maint with my patch applied ... way too many errors.

Prior to seeing your message I had created a small patch which applied your changes on top of my patch. This worked.

So, I "faked it." Created a branch off v0.10.2-maint and applied the patches [mine and my version of yours]. Tarballed the changed files (there are not that many).

Create a new branch off master. Restore the tarball. Git cannot tell what order things were done so everybody is happy.

I am sure this made you cringe but, well, it worked. Patch to list "real soon now" [I really have to learn more on how to use git]

Gene


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]