On 20 Jan 2015, at 17:18, Erik Schnetter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 20, 2015, at 8:01 , Ian Hinder <[email protected]> wrote: >> 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? > > Yes, this is possible. I'm also working in another project where the > developers very much insist on a clean history, so I'm rebasing and > force-pushing there all the time. (They believe that a clean history helps > git-bisect -- I very much disagree; rebasing creates commits that no human > every saw and that were never compiled, so it doesn't avoid intermediate > build failures, but that's beside the point here.) I did get myself into a > bind with pulling, merging, and resolving conflicts, and I force-pushed to > the int16 branch to resolve this. (Bad habit, easy to adopt.) > > I may have force-pushed to the wrong branch. Since my GUI doesn't support > force-pushing, I have to do it from the shell. Probably easy to be on the > wrong branch there. Sorry. Yes, please disable it, including for Carpet. I have disabled it manually for the flesh and for Carpet; to do all the repositories, we probably want to use a script. -- Ian Hinder http://members.aei.mpg.de/ianhin
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users
