On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 5:36 PM Michael Kubacki
wrote:
> This is the first time Uncrustify has been updated in edk2 since Dec 7,
> 2021.
>
> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/commits/master/.pytool/Plugin/UncrustifyCheck/uncrustify_ext_dep.yaml
>
> Its configuration has also not changed during
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 9:08 AM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>
> On 11/16/23 09:29, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 3:01 PM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/13/23 22:33, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 8:37 PM Rebecca Cran wrote:
>
> On 11/13/2023 1:08
On 11/16/23 09:29, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 3:01 PM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>
>> On 11/13/23 22:33, Pedro Falcato wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 8:37 PM Rebecca Cran wrote:
On 11/13/2023 1:08 PM, Michael Kubacki wrote:
> Yes. I just did it. It is relatively
On 11/16/2023 3:29 AM, Pedro Falcato wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 3:01 PM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
On 11/13/23 22:33, Pedro Falcato wrote:
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 8:37 PM Rebecca Cran wrote:
On 11/13/2023 1:08 PM, Michael Kubacki wrote:
Yes. I just did it. It is relatively minor and impacts
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 3:01 PM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>
> On 11/13/23 22:33, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 8:37 PM Rebecca Cran wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/13/2023 1:08 PM, Michael Kubacki wrote:
> >>> Yes. I just did it. It is relatively minor and impacts expected code
> >>> areas.
On 11/14/23 16:12, Rebecca Cran wrote:
> On 11/14/2023 7:51 AM, Laszlo Ersek via groups.io wrote:
>
>> Funnily enough, my stance is quite the opposite. I happen to disagree
>> with some patterns that uncrustify enforces, but I'm thankful that at
>> any given state of CI (= using any given version
On 11/14/2023 7:51 AM, Laszlo Ersek via groups.io wrote:
Funnily enough, my stance is quite the opposite. I happen to disagree
with some patterns that uncrustify enforces, but I'm thankful that at
any given state of CI (= using any given version of uncrustify), we
can't have any more debates
On 11/13/23 22:33, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 8:37 PM Rebecca Cran wrote:
>>
>> On 11/13/2023 1:08 PM, Michael Kubacki wrote:
>>> Yes. I just did it. It is relatively minor and impacts expected code
>>> areas.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5043/files
>>
>>
>>
On 11/13/23 20:07, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:58 AM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> recently I encountered an uncrustify failure on github.
>>
>> The reason was that my local uncrustify was *more recent* (73.0.8) than
>> the one we use in edk2 CI (which is
On 11/13/2023 3:37 PM, Rebecca Cran wrote:
On 11/13/2023 1:08 PM, Michael Kubacki wrote:
Yes. I just did it. It is relatively minor and impacts expected code
areas.
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5043/files
Could you update .git-blame-ignore-revs please?
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 8:37 PM Rebecca Cran wrote:
>
> On 11/13/2023 1:08 PM, Michael Kubacki wrote:
> > Yes. I just did it. It is relatively minor and impacts expected code
> > areas.
> >
> > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5043/files
>
>
> Could you update .git-blame-ignore-revs please?
t; To: Pedro Falcato ; devel@edk2.groups.io;
> ler...@redhat.com
> Cc: Kinney, Michael D ; Andrew Fish
> ; Marcin Juszkiewicz ;
> Leif Lindholm (Quic)
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] edk2 uncrustify update (73.0.8)?
>
> On 11/13/2023 2:07 PM, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> > On Mon
On 11/13/2023 2:14 PM, Rebecca Cran via groups.io wrote:
On 11/13/2023 5:29 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz via groups.io wrote:
Still a fan of adding edk2-uncrustify to BaseTools. If we are expected
to use it then let it get installed at same moment as "build" command is.
The issue with doing this
On 11/13/2023 1:08 PM, Michael Kubacki wrote:
Yes. I just did it. It is relatively minor and impacts expected code
areas.
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5043/files
Could you update .git-blame-ignore-revs please?
On 11/13/2023 2:07 PM, Pedro Falcato wrote:
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:58 AM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Hi Michael,
recently I encountered an uncrustify failure on github.
The reason was that my local uncrustify was *more recent* (73.0.8) than
the one we use in edk2 CI (which is 73.0.3, per the
On 11/13/2023 6:58 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Hi Michael,
recently I encountered an uncrustify failure on github.
The reason was that my local uncrustify was *more recent* (73.0.8) than
the one we use in edk2 CI (which is 73.0.3, per the edk2 file
On 11/13/2023 5:29 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz via groups.io wrote:
Still a fan of adding edk2-uncrustify to BaseTools. If we are expected
to use it then let it get installed at same moment as "build" command is.
The issue with doing this is there's a push to remove all C/C++ code
from BaseTools
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 7:07 PM Pedro Falcato via groups.io
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:58 AM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > recently I encountered an uncrustify failure on github.
> >
> > The reason was that my local uncrustify was *more recent* (73.0.8) than
> > the
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:58 AM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> recently I encountered an uncrustify failure on github.
>
> The reason was that my local uncrustify was *more recent* (73.0.8) than
> the one we use in edk2 CI (which is 73.0.3, per the edk2 file
>
W dniu 13.11.2023 o 12:58, Laszlo Ersek pisze:
Note that 73.0.3 indents the subexpression to the "//" comment on the
previous line, while 73.0.8 ignores the comment -- which I think is
justified here.
I believe this improvement may come from uncrustify commit 239c4fad745b
("Prevent endless
Hi Michael,
recently I encountered an uncrustify failure on github.
The reason was that my local uncrustify was *more recent* (73.0.8) than
the one we use in edk2 CI (which is 73.0.3, per the edk2 file
".pytool/Plugin/UncrustifyCheck/uncrustify_ext_dep.yaml").
Updating the version number in the
21 matches
Mail list logo
