From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from dude02.hi.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:100:1d::28] helo=dude02.lab.pengutronix.de) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jQsfj-0006hX-BG for ptxdist@pengutronix.de; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:10:43 +0200 Received: from mol by dude02.lab.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jQsfj-0004mU-1x for ptxdist@pengutronix.de; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:10:43 +0200 Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:10:43 +0200 From: Michael Olbrich Message-ID: <20200421131043.GK2081@pengutronix.de> References: <20200421101430.27631-1-Denis.Osterland@diehl.com> <20200421105420.mb33fnquv7n7ddlo@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] host-mfgtools: version bump 1.3.167 -> 1.3.169 List-Id: PTXdist Development Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: ptxdist@pengutronix.de Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ptxdist-bounces@pengutronix.de Sender: "ptxdist" To: ptxdist@pengutronix.de On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:22:36PM +0000, Denis Osterland-Heim wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 21.04.2020, 12:54 +0200 schrieb Roland Hieber: > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 10:15:01AM +0000, Denis Osterland-Heim wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Denis Osterland-Heim > > > --- > > > Hi, > > > > > > the 167 source tarball has two toplevel directories, one with the git > > > submodule content and one without. This was an accident by upstream and > > > is fixed in 169. It worked on my machine but on older machines (Ubuntu > > > 16.04) it failed because of mv can not override directories. > > > I am not sure why it works on my PC. > > > > Michael already pushed a fix for this on master in commit > > e5d4c7c479293eb34345 ("host-mfgtools: fix random extract failures") by > > handling it in the extract stage. Please rebase onto the current master > > to test the version bump, and test if the extract step is still needed :) > Shame on me that I was to slow. > I will do so. I am sure we can get rid of special extract stage. > > I would go with an additional revert patch, or would it be better to squash it? Just one patch to keep it bisectable. Michael -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ ptxdist mailing list ptxdist@pengutronix.de