On 19 Jan 2015, at 18:23, [email protected] wrote:

> BUILD FAILURE
> 
> Build URL:    https://build.barrywardell.net/job/EinsteinToolkit/409/
> Project:      EinsteinToolkit
> Date of build:        Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:13:41 +0000
> Build duration:       9 min 29 sec
> 
> Changes
> 
> Revision:     68cdcc5ecc34e0fac714e13a5a53016651a64903
> Author:       Einstein Toolkit Git Server
> Log:  
> Updated submodules:
> 
> * arrangements/CactusBase 11f4180...9b1bab2 (1):
>   > CactusBase: Support CCTK_INT16
> 
> * arrangements/CactusNumerical 93a286d...49912fb (1):
>   > CactusNumerical: Support CCTK_INT16
> 
> * arrangements/CactusPUGH 0ac5c78...cb3c70f (1):
>   > PUGH: Support CCTK_INT16
> 
> * arrangements/CactusTest 8c3b35b...48004a2 (1):
>   > TestAllTypes: Test CCTK_INT16
> 
> * repos/carpet 7ddf438...2efdefc (2):
>   > CarpetLib: Disable new bboxset class if the compiler does not support 
> C++11
>   > Merge branch 'eschnett/int16'

Hi,

This test failure was caused by the git super-repository update system not 
successfully updating the flesh in its working copy.  I believe this was caused 
by somebody pushing a commit which rewrote the flesh history.  From the 
repository history I can see, I think this was the push by Erik at 15-Jan-2015 
19:12 which added commit 

        104612e - Cactus: Output schedule routine when outputting warnings 
(2014-12-31) <Erik Schnetter>

with parent

        c7fd13a - Merged in redirect_root (pull request #2) (2014-12-30) <Frank 
Löffler> 

The master branch then evolved from this commit.  However, there were already 
more commits on master, including

        065b00c - Merged in simple_make_for_single_config (pull request #6) 
(2015-01-12) <Frank Löffler>
        f47e1d0 - (origin/simple_make_for_single_config) Don't require 
configuration name when only one is present anyway. (2014-12-25) <Frank 
Loeffler>
        9c7a72a - Merged in Makefile_invalid_configuration_names (pull request 
#5) (2015-01-12) <Frank Löffler>

which were then lost.  These commits were then added onto the end of master (I 
think again by Erik?), so that the code was correct, but the history was 
different.

I'm basing this on the history I can see in the update server's copy of the 
repository, and the commit email notifications which give the timeline of 
pushes.

This could have been caused by Erik rebasing his master branch off a feature 
branch, instead of the other way around, and then overriding the warning when 
pushing to bitbucket by adding the --force option to "git push".  Erik, is it 
possible that this is what happened?

The super-repo update system should have detected the failure to update and 
sent me an email, but there is a bug there which means it ignored the error.  I 
have corrected the repository problem on the update server.

I believe the current master branch contains all the code that it should, and 
that it will now update correctly, unless another forced push is performed.  

Possible actions:

        – We could disable forced pushes in bitbucket for the master branch to 
stop this happening again (this should presumably be done for all the 
repositories, so it should be done by a script).  

        – The super-repo update system should be fixed so that errors like this 
are detected and reported

-- 
Ian Hinder
http://members.aei.mpg.de/ianhin

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to