From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90D321FF164 for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Fri, 14 Mar 2025 10:48:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 526A53791A; Fri, 14 Mar 2025 10:48:38 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 10:48:34 +0100 From: Gabriel Goller <g.goller@proxmox.com> To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> Message-ID: <cngvyo3qqlqtch4abm7dawtktnrhuajpja5og3jdd4v3ozlcnm@mj55uoto7zgn> Mail-Followup-To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>, pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20250313124956.367059-1-g.goller@proxmox.com> <285a3e7b-30e9-4162-9b2d-cbdb0d8d5810@proxmox.com> <zjcd5mtjczr4fltdi6tal5lbr6jtnsf2b4f35e734ik2s42nxf@kgaphbcyxizo> <aa092130-7d45-44e3-9936-ff621cd656c9@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <aa092130-7d45-44e3-9936-ff621cd656c9@proxmox.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20241002-35-39f9a6 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.028 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH frr] frr: fix bit flag collision in patch X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> Cc: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" <pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com> On 14.03.2025 10:33, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: >On 13/03/2025 16:49, Gabriel Goller wrote: >> On 13.03.2025 16:16, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: >>> w.r.t. versioning I'd have bumped the pve1 part to pve2. >> >> So '10.2.1-1+pve2'? > >Exactly. > >>>> + * fix fabricd dummy_as_loopback flag collision >>> >>> collision with what? these entries should be telling for end users (not devs). >> >> True, a simpler "fix fabricd dummy_as_loopback flag" would be enough. > >No, my question was with what this collides, your correction does not answer >that at all and is equally "bad" compared to the original. Maybe something >along the lines of: > > * fix collision in fabricd for the option values of the recent dummy-as-loopback > backport and a internal test mode, where enabling one would always enable the > other. > >As that tells admins actually what collided and what the basic effect was. Ah, I thought you meant making it simpler for the admin without going into details. Will fix this. >>>> + >>>> + -- Gabriel Goller <g.goller@proxmox.com> Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:33:46 +0100 > >I overlooked that above should be 'Proxmox Support Team <support@proxmox.com>' >dch uses the DEBEMAIL environment variable here, so you can add something like > >export DEBEMAIL='Proxmox Support Team <support@proxmox.com>' > >to your shell's rc file to get that correct, makes most sense if you primarily >develop on Proxmox projects on that host, e.g. I have a dedicated development VM >to contain all this stuff, otherwise adding an alias that sets this correctly >might be also an option. Oops, yeah my bad. >> Stefan said the exact same thing :) >> This is done quite commonly in frr e.g.: >> https://git.proxmox.com/?p=mirror_frr.git;a=blob;f=bgpd/bgpd.h;h=9cb1d51088cfc456f344b17b8068f84d382e3751;hb=HEAD#l210. >> But I don't think it's that bad anyway :). > >If they use it already, then fine, but lets not introduce this in any of our >(C) code. It's also done quite commonly in the linux kernel, but fine, I'll remember to not user it here :) Thanks again for looking at this and sorry for the oversights. Will send a v2 soon. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel