Perl 6 - the future is here, just unevenly distributed

IRC log for #gluster-dev, 2014-10-20

| Channels | #gluster-dev index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:38 bala joined #gluster-dev
02:17 suliba joined #gluster-dev
02:22 bala joined #gluster-dev
03:04 kshlm joined #gluster-dev
03:23 lalatenduM joined #gluster-dev
03:50 shubhendu joined #gluster-dev
03:57 bharata-rao joined #gluster-dev
04:03 itisravi joined #gluster-dev
04:40 kdhananjay joined #gluster-dev
04:42 ppai joined #gluster-dev
04:43 ndarshan joined #gluster-dev
04:46 rafi1 joined #gluster-dev
04:46 Rafi_kc joined #gluster-dev
04:54 kanagaraj joined #gluster-dev
04:54 deepakcs joined #gluster-dev
04:55 nishanth joined #gluster-dev
05:07 atinmu joined #gluster-dev
05:17 spandit joined #gluster-dev
05:25 kshlm joined #gluster-dev
05:29 aravindavk joined #gluster-dev
05:30 atinmu joined #gluster-dev
05:37 anoopcs joined #gluster-dev
05:38 hagarth joined #gluster-dev
05:41 kaushal_ joined #gluster-dev
05:56 kanagaraj joined #gluster-dev
06:10 jiffin joined #gluster-dev
06:11 ndarshan joined #gluster-dev
06:11 bala joined #gluster-dev
06:13 soumya joined #gluster-dev
06:15 shubhendu joined #gluster-dev
06:17 aravindavk joined #gluster-dev
06:24 atinmu joined #gluster-dev
06:44 bala joined #gluster-dev
06:53 nishanth joined #gluster-dev
06:54 atalur joined #gluster-dev
07:14 deepakcs joined #gluster-dev
07:17 aravindavk joined #gluster-dev
07:37 kshlm joined #gluster-dev
07:37 kshlm joined #gluster-dev
07:57 rgustafs joined #gluster-dev
08:27 raghu joined #gluster-dev
08:33 spandit_ joined #gluster-dev
08:55 vimal joined #gluster-dev
09:04 bala joined #gluster-dev
09:16 hagarth Humble: ping, https://registry.hub.docker​.com/u/paulczar/glusterfs/
09:17 Humble hagarth, checking .. thanks
09:23 bala joined #gluster-dev
09:34 deepakcs joined #gluster-dev
09:44 aravindavk joined #gluster-dev
09:49 atinmu joined #gluster-dev
09:53 edward1 joined #gluster-dev
10:00 spandit_ joined #gluster-dev
10:06 bala joined #gluster-dev
10:20 kshlm joined #gluster-dev
10:22 kanagaraj joined #gluster-dev
10:30 RaSTar joined #gluster-dev
10:31 RaSTar joined #gluster-dev
10:39 kanagaraj joined #gluster-dev
10:39 aravindavk joined #gluster-dev
10:40 atinmu joined #gluster-dev
10:45 xavih hagarth++: thanks :)
10:45 glusterbot xavih: hagarth's karma is now 16
10:45 hagarth xavih: yw :)
10:48 hagarth xavih: any other patches in ec before beta4 for 3.6?
10:49 xavih hagarth: I would like to include the self-heal patch and the one I'm working on right now...
10:49 xavih hagarth: I'm rebasing the self-heal patch (it has some conflicts)
10:50 xavih hagarth: I can add the new patch as a dependency of this one (once rebased) to review it sooner
10:50 xavih hagarth: is this much trouble ?
10:52 hagarth xavih: should not be a problem, by when do you expect these patches to be available for review?
10:56 xavih hagarth: the new patch is finished. I can upload it today once I resolve the conflicts
11:00 shyam joined #gluster-dev
11:14 kaushal_ joined #gluster-dev
11:14 hagarth xavih: cool, if all goes well I plan to release beta4 tomorrow
11:18 ppai joined #gluster-dev
11:23 kanagaraj joined #gluster-dev
11:29 ppai joined #gluster-dev
11:47 soumya_ joined #gluster-dev
11:50 nishanth joined #gluster-dev
12:10 lalatenduM msvbhat, chown <user> /var/log/tests
12:10 msvbhat lalatenduM: Yes
12:11 msvbhat lalatenduM: You can also use -R for recursive
12:11 lalatenduM msvbhat, chown -R <user> /var/log/tests
12:14 kkeithley would someone please review http://review.gluster.org/8671 ?  It's the last of Raghavendra's DHT fixes for 3.4!  Thanks
12:24 kkeithley s/fixes for 3.4/fixes for 3.4.6/
13:07 rgustafs joined #gluster-dev
13:07 tdasilva joined #gluster-dev
13:31 kkeithley joined #gluster-dev
13:56 bala joined #gluster-dev
14:10 jbautista- joined #gluster-dev
14:34 kkeithley ndevos: do you know what the correct way to submit a related set of patches in gerrit is?  If I submit the last one, will all the required/prerequisite patches get submitted? Or do I have to submit them in order?
14:35 kkeithley E.g. 8670-8685
14:36 kkeithley If in order, that's might be painful.  I submitted 8670, but then 8671 needed to be rebased. And I can't proceed now until 8671 is verified (by jenkins)
14:36 kkeithley s/that's/that/
14:38 kkeithley 8671 needed to be rebased. IOW gerritt would not accept it, indicated that it needed to be rebased. So I did that, but now gerritt won't take the submit.
14:38 kkeithley this is entirely on the release-3.4 branch.
14:40 ndevos kkeithley: uh, I need more time to parse that...
14:40 kkeithley ;-) yeah, me too
14:40 ndevos kkeithley: ah, I think I understand what you mean
14:40 ndevos you have 8670-...
14:40 kkeithley correct
14:41 ndevos and, you submitted (merged) the 1st one
14:41 kkeithley yup
14:41 ndevos now Gerrit shows [OUTDATED] no the next?
14:41 ndevos s/no/on/
14:41 kkeithley yes, I think that's what it showed
14:42 ndevos if so, you do not really need to rebase it - just submit, Gerrit figures it out all right
14:42 ndevos the whole series was tested by Jenkins, I assume
14:42 kkeithley it would not let me. Not without a rebase first.
14:42 ndevos no? hmm, that is how I normally do it
14:43 kkeithley Yes, Everything had been verified all the way through 8685
14:43 ndevos unless there has been a conflicting change, and that requires the rebase
14:43 kkeithley no other changes on -release-3.4 branch had been submitted
14:43 kkeithley submitted/merged
14:45 kkeithley It seemed to me like it should have been a straight forward merge
14:46 ndevos how did you rebase it?
14:46 kkeithley no other changes on -release-3.4 branch had been submitted.  The first one, 8670, depended on the last merge I made to the -release-3.4 branch
14:46 ndevos did you use the Gerrit interface, or manual?
14:46 kkeithley I pressed the rebase button in gerrit
14:46 kkeithley gerritt
14:46 ndevos okay, so it was a straight forward rebase/merge
14:47 ndevos I normally do not press the 'rebase' button if I apply a set of patches
14:47 kkeithley seemed so. gerrit just "did it"
14:47 ndevos because, well, that needs re-reviews
14:47 ramon_dl joined #gluster-dev
14:48 ndevos Gerrit thinks there is a rebase needed, because the commit-hash of the previous patch changed (updated commit message)
14:48 ndevos if you are confident that the series is solid, just do not press the rebase button and stick with submit
14:49 ndevos that works for me, even if Gerrit would like me to rebase the change
14:50 ndevos http://review.gluster.org/#/c/8672/ would be in such a state now - I'd just submit it (after submitting 8671)
14:50 kkeithley hmmm. Okay. Even though it only happened about ten minutes ago ;-) I don't recall... I guess when it said I needed to rebase it the first time I tried to submit that I believed it and didn't try to submit/merge again, and followed its advice to rebase
14:51 ndevos if you press submit, and Gerrit can not apply the patch, it will complain :)
14:51 kkeithley I'll try. I can just set +1 Verified manually on 8671 instead of waiting for jenkins
14:52 ndevos yeah, I'd do that as well
15:13 shyam joined #gluster-dev
15:28 bala joined #gluster-dev
15:40 charta joined #gluster-dev
15:58 jobewan joined #gluster-dev
16:08 hagarth joined #gluster-dev
16:31 JustinClift Hmmm, does "#define UNIX_PATH_MAX 104" in libglusterfs/src/compat.h sound right?
16:31 JustinClift Seems like a typo of 1024
16:31 JustinClift ?
16:33 hagarth JustinClift: no, UNIX_PATH_MAX is indeed 104
16:37 JustinClift ;)
16:37 JustinClift Tx
17:17 tdasilva joined #gluster-dev
17:49 charta joined #gluster-dev
17:54 ira joined #gluster-dev
18:34 ira joined #gluster-dev
19:08 kkeithley UNIX_PATH_MAX  really means Unix Domain Socket max path.  On my f20 box it's 108, defined in /usr/include/linux/un.h
19:09 bfoster joined #gluster-dev
19:11 JustinClift kkeithley: Kinda thinking I've asked this exact question before too. ;)
19:11 kkeithley Not defined anywhere on *BSD (including Mac OS X)
19:12 kkeithley Any software worth writing once is worth writing two or three times at least. Ditto for questions. ;-)
19:12 JustinClift :)
19:14 kkeithley there's no define UNIX_MAX_PATH on *BSD, but sockaddr_un has:        char    sun_path[104];          /* path name (gag) */
19:14 tdasilva joined #gluster-dev
19:17 kkeithley And oh, look, there's the update for Xcode for Yosemite. Good timing
19:25 kkeithley Spinal Tap, the Linux Edition: Our Unix Domain Socket Names go to 108.
21:40 badone joined #gluster-dev
22:28 badone joined #gluster-dev
22:41 badone joined #gluster-dev

| Channels | #gluster-dev index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary