[Lustre-discuss] Lustre-discuss Digest, Vol 72, Issue 21

[Ms. Megan Larko]

Greetings!

Wow!   Thank you Brian.   That is *exactly* the sort of instruction I
needed.   I was under the erroneous assumption that the lower of the
Bugzilla numbers would be the object of my search in the event of a
duplicate bug.   I never traced BZ 21681 as I thought it was the
"duplicate" and that the trail would be in the "original".

I appreciate the detailed info.   Thanks for teaching me how to fish.

megan

On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 2:00 PM,
<lustre-discuss-request at lists.lustre.org> wrote:
> Send Lustre-discuss mailing list submissions to
>        lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        lustre-discuss-request at lists.lustre.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        lustre-discuss-owner at lists.lustre.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Lustre-discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: landing of Lustre Bugzilla 19579 (Brian J. Murrell)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:23:53 -0500
> From: "Brian J. Murrell" <brian at whamcloud.com>
> Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] landing of Lustre Bugzilla 19579
> To: lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> Message-ID: <4F22F9C9.8080502 at whamcloud.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On 12-01-27 02:01 PM, Ms. Megan Larko wrote:
>> Hello,
>
> Hi,
>
>> I have gone through the Lustre CHANGELOG for 1.8.x and I do not see
>> where bug 19579 has been addressed.   I see it being resolved, but in
>> which version was the fix landed please?   There are reasons why the
>> customer may not be able to go to the latest and greatest 1.8.x
>> version of Lustre.  I am looking for documentation on what version
>> addresses the message described in 19579.
>
> If you look at the resolution of bug 19579 it says that it was resolved
> as a duplicate of bug 21681.  From there I go to my clone of
> git.whamcloud.com and make sure I am on branch b1_8.
>
> I then use git log to see everything that has been committed and search
> for "b=21681" and it finds commit
> df214dd2e53f58be1f8cacdecb2fec54871a120e.  If I then use "git describe
> --contains df214dd2e53f58be1f8cacdecb2fec54871a120e", it reports
> v1_8_1_60~13 which I can interpret as having landed before v1_8_1_60 was
> tagged, or in terms of which GA release, it would be in 1.8.2.
>
> Additionally bugzilla says that 21681 landed in 1.8.2 and if I check the
> lustre/ChangeLog on my Whamcloud clone I can see that that bugzilla id
> is indeed listed in the changelog under release 1.8.2.
>
> Cheers,
> b.
>
> --
> Brian J. Murrell
> Senior Software Engineer
> Whamcloud, Inc.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 262 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url : http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss/attachments/20120127/f1da8678/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>
>
> End of Lustre-discuss Digest, Vol 72, Issue 21
> **********************************************