lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issue 5099 - staging broken?


From: James
Subject: Re: Issue 5099 - staging broken?
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 11:00:14 +0100

On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 10:53:19 +0200
Thomas Morley <address@hidden> wrote:

> 2017-03-26 10:06 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> > Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:
> >  
> >> 2017-03-26 0:48 GMT+01:00 James <address@hidden>:  
> >>> Hello
> >>>
> >>> After 5099 was pushed I am now seeing problems with basic
> >>> 'make'.  
> >  
> >>
> >> accidently I permanently deleted the branch where the patch for
> >> issue 5099 was. But I had it as git-formated patch, so I reapplied
> >> it to a new branch and pushed from there.
> >>
> >> I've now retested make successfully, though.
> >>
> >> So I've no clue what's wrong.  
> >
> > Huh?
> >
> > diff --git a/scm/lily-library.scm b/scm/lily-library.scm
> > index c6f066ca32..1b3926af7f 100644
> > --- a/scm/lily-library.scm
> > +++ b/scm/lily-library.scm
> > @@ -778,9 +778,9 @@ as rectangular coordinates @code{(x-length .
> > y-length)}."
> >
> >  (define-public (remove-whitespace strg)
> >  "Remove characters satisfying @code{char-whitespace?} from string
> > @var{strg}"
> > -  (string-delete
> > -    strg
> > -    char-whitespace?))
> > +  (if (guile-v2)
> > +      (string-delete char-whitespace? strg)
> > +      (string-delete strg char-whitespace?))
> >
> >  (define-public (string-encode-integer i)
> >    (cond
> >
> > The deleted lines have a net paren change of -1 (one paren more
> > closed than opened).  The added lines have a net paren change of 0.
> >
> > This cannot possibly have worked.  
> 
> Indeed.
> How could it survive automatic tests then?
> 
> >
> > But that's issue 5101 according to the commit message.  
> 
> Yep.
> 5099 looks still ok to me.
> 
> > Backing out that patch from staging, and taking a further look.  
> 
> How to proceed?
> Upload a fixed patch for review?
> 
> I'm terribly sorry for the additional work for you and James,
>   Harm
> 

It wasn't much additional work is exactly why we moved to a
staging branch workflow in the first place. You aren't the first to
'break staging' and you won't be the last and as of 'now' it looks like
it is all merged successfully.

James






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]