Re: [RTEMS Project] #4016: shm_unlink uses uninitialized obj_err on successful return from _POSIX_Shm_Get_by_name

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4016: shm_unlink uses uninitialized obj_err on successful return from
_POSIX_Shm_Get_by_name
--+-
 Reporter:  Kinsey Moore  |   Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect|  Status:  new
 Priority:  normal|   Milestone:  5.1
Component:  posix | Version:  5
 Severity:  normal|  Resolution:
 Keywords:|  Blocked By:
 Blocking:|
--+-

Comment (by Chris Johns):

 Thanks. Joel or someone who knows this part of the POSIX code is going to
 have to review these changes. I am working towards an RC2 so if the review
 is not done I will be forced to bump then to 5.2.

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4036: Track dependency command for the RSB

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4036: Track dependency command for the RSB
-+--
 Reporter:  Chris Johns  |   Owner:  Chris Johns
 Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  closed
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  tool/rsb | Version:  6
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+--
Changes (by Chris Johns ):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 In [changeset:"12418190b984f3f94da08588276ef3d6440bd454/rtems-source-
 builder" 1241819/rtems-source-builder]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository="rtems-source-builder"
 revision="12418190b984f3f94da08588276ef3d6440bd454"
 sb/track: Add a command to track build sets.

 - Process a build set for a range of hosts and output a dependency
   tree, the used build set and configuration files.
 - Output the configuration files that are no referenced

 Closes #4036
 }}}

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4045: Remove RSB sb-builder command

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4045: Remove RSB sb-builder command
-+--
 Reporter:  Chris Johns  |   Owner:  Chris Johns
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  closed
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  tool/rsb | Version:  6
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+--
Changes (by Chris Johns ):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 In [changeset:"481bbd11093b238afb6225f3f08a1ef513d0d042/rtems-source-
 builder" 481bbd1/rtems-source-builder]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository="rtems-source-builder"
 revision="481bbd11093b238afb6225f3f08a1ef513d0d042"
 sb/builder: Remove sb-builder command

 Closes #4045
 }}}

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4046: Remove RSB sb-bootstrap command

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4046: Remove RSB sb-bootstrap command
-+--
 Reporter:  Chris Johns  |   Owner:  Chris Johns
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  closed
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  tool/rsb | Version:  6
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+--
Changes (by Chris Johns ):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 In [changeset:"a863b15fdbbfc8af577d92ae6ed6d0b3c151e6cb/rtems-source-
 builder" a863b15/rtems-source-builder]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository="rtems-source-builder"
 revision="a863b15fdbbfc8af577d92ae6ed6d0b3c151e6cb"
 sb/bootstrap: Remove the sb-bootstrap command

 Closes #4046
 }}}

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

[RTEMS Project] #4047: RSB 4.11 fails to build rtems-tools

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4047: RSB 4.11 fails to build rtems-tools
--+
  Reporter:  Patrick Roncagliolo  |  Owner:  (none)
  Type:  defect   | Status:  new
  Priority:  normal   |  Milestone:  4.11.4
 Component:  tool/rsb |Version:  4.11
  Severity:  normal   |   Keywords:
Blocked By:   |   Blocking:
--+
 I checked out RSB on branch 4.11.

 The execution of the following command fails

 {{{
 ../source-builder/sb-set-builder --prefix=/mnt/sdb/rtems/4.11 4.11/rtems-
 powerpc --jobs 16
 }}}

 with the following error:


 {{{
 Waf: Entering directory `/mnt/sdb/rtems/src_4.10/rsb/rtems/sources/git
 /rtems-tools.git/build'
 [ 16/258] Compiling rtemstoolkit/elftoolchain/libelf/elf.c
 ../rtemstoolkit/elftoolchain/libelf/elf.c:34:29: error: expected
 expression before ‘,’ token
   .libelf_arch  = LIBELF_ARCH,
  ^

 Build failed
 }}}

 How can I obtain a working 4.11 toolchain?

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4016: shm_unlink uses uninitialized obj_err on successful return from _POSIX_Shm_Get_by_name

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4016: shm_unlink uses uninitialized obj_err on successful return from
_POSIX_Shm_Get_by_name
--+-
 Reporter:  Kinsey Moore  |   Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect|  Status:  new
 Priority:  normal|   Milestone:  5.1
Component:  posix | Version:  5
 Severity:  normal|  Resolution:
 Keywords:|  Blocked By:
 Blocking:|
--+-

Comment (by Kinsey Moore):

 Sure, this is the first patch posted for master back in January:
 https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-January/056993.html

 And this is the more recent patch posted for 5.x specifically for this
 issue:
 https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-June/060292.html

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #3199: New test framework

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#3199: New test framework
-+--
 Reporter:  Sebastian Huber  |   Owner:  Sebastian Huber
 Type:  enhancement  |  Status:  accepted
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  lib  | Version:  5
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:  3716 |
-+--

Comment (by Sebastian Huber ):

 In [changeset:"20c79bf5eb35df83253b9ead0a6c070b575100cb/rtems"
 20c79bf/rtems]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository="rtems"
 revision="20c79bf5eb35df83253b9ead0a6c070b575100cb"
 libtest: Constify

 Update #3199.
 }}}

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4020: Change all version numbers to RTEMS 6 on the master branches

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4020: Change all version numbers to RTEMS 6 on the master branches
-+--
 Reporter:  Sebastian Huber  |   Owner:  Sebastian Huber
 Type:  task |  Status:  assigned
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  build| Version:  6
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+--

Comment (by Sebastian Huber ):

 In [changeset:"6626ed504c954d0208129b3b2c8524fcfe572f12/rtems"
 6626ed50/rtems]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository="rtems"
 revision="6626ed504c954d0208129b3b2c8524fcfe572f12"
 Doxyfile: Change version to 6.0.0

 Update #4020.
 }}}

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #3859: No output from joel scripts in telnet

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#3859: No output from joel scripts in telnet
-+--
 Reporter:  Chris Johns  |   Owner:  Chris Johns
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  closed
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  5.1
Component:  shell| Version:  5
 Severity:  blocker  |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+--

Comment (by Sebastian Huber ):

 In [changeset:"cb4358c9b16289d938f41d04a71dfaddb9716b0e/rtems-docs"
 cb4358c/rtems-docs]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository="rtems-docs"
 revision="cb4358c9b16289d938f41d04a71dfaddb9716b0e"
 user: Add shell environment migration aid

 Update #3859.
 }}}

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4037: Python script distribution standardisation

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4037: Python script distribution standardisation
-+-
 Reporter:  Chris Johns  |   Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  new
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  admin| Version:  6
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+-

Comment (by Chris Johns):

 Replying to [comment:17 Christian Mauderer]:
 > > > The last point is definitively a controversial one. There are good
 reasons for both directions. But again: Maybe that should be discussed
 with a broader audience?
 > >
 > > I think there will be some push back to dropping Python2 right now and
 this will fade as time goes on.
 >
 > There would be some advantages too. Maybe we should discuss an indicator
 that it is time to drop the python2 support (for example: as soon as waf
 does; or as soon as CentOS doesn't installs it by default; or in 1 year;
 or ...) so that there is a clear plan and it isn't discussed again and
 again every few months. But like you said: That's not the topic of this
 ticket and I think it would be better to discuss this on the mailing list.

 I think the new build system and the qual project need to be done and we
 have releases with them. I think at the core of this issue is releases
 with python 2 and 3 and once we know how they are traveling it will become
 apparent what we can do.

 I will remove the script support in the RSB and close this ticket when it
 is merged.

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4037: Python script distribution standardisation

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4037: Python script distribution standardisation
-+-
 Reporter:  Chris Johns  |   Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  new
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  admin| Version:  6
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+-

Comment (by Christian Mauderer):

 > > The last point is definitively a controversial one. There are good
 reasons for both directions. But again: Maybe that should be discussed
 with a broader audience?
 >
 > I think there will be some push back to dropping Python2 right now and
 this will fade as time goes on.

 There would be some advantages too. Maybe we should discuss an indicator
 that it is time to drop the python2 support (for example: as soon as waf
 does; or as soon as CentOS doesn't installs it by default; or in 1 year;
 or ...) so that there is a clear plan and it isn't discussed again and
 again every few months. But like you said: That's not the topic of this
 ticket and I think it would be better to discuss this on the mailing list.

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4044: Add RSB Track command

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4044: Add RSB Track command
-+--
 Reporter:  Chris Johns  |   Owner:  Chris Johns
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  closed
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  tool/rsb | Version:  6
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:  duplicate
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+--
Changes (by Chris Johns):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => duplicate


Comment:

 Duplicate of #4036.

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Re: [RTEMS Project] #4037: Python script distribution standardisation

2020-08-10 Thread RTEMS trac
#4037: Python script distribution standardisation
-+-
 Reporter:  Chris Johns  |   Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  new
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  6.1
Component:  admin| Version:  6
 Severity:  normal   |  Resolution:
 Keywords:   |  Blocked By:
 Blocking:   |
-+-

Comment (by Chris Johns):

 Replying to [comment:15 Christian Mauderer]:
 > I think the first three points answer the original question of the
 ticket? Did I miss something from the discussion?

 I agree and no I do not think you have.

 > The last point is definitively a controversial one. There are good
 reasons for both directions. But again: Maybe that should be discussed
 with a broader audience?

 I think there will be some push back to dropping Python2 right now and
 this will fade as time goes on.

--
Ticket URL: 
RTEMS Project 
RTEMS Project
___
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs