On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:13 AM Prarit Bhargava <prarit(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 5/13/20 10:31 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 07:22:45AM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>> On 5/13/20 3:50 AM, Jiri Benc wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 May 2020 20:19:09 -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>>>> My patch in merge request 354 changes the names of makefile targets from
rh-* to
>>>> dist-*
>>>
>>> I haven't seen that patch on kernel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org. What's
>>> going on?
>
> The piece of the puzzle you are probably missing is:
>
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark-ci
>
Thanks. That's what I was looking for.
> which holds the CI scripts. It is in a separate repo for security reasons
> (don't want a kernel change to include modifying the CI scripts to falsely
> pass something malicious).
>
> However, that split leads to the scenario you are in, how to update both at
> the same time, which we were trying to avoid again for security reasons
> (always want to use either a tag or head of master, not a custom branch for
> the CI scripts).
>
> We may have to create a transition patch to handle this. Unfortunately you
> hit this scenario sooner than we were expecting to deal with it. :-(
Heh :) Of course it's my fault :) :)
How about these steps?
1) I patch to add the dist-* targets and keep the old rh-* targets temporarily.
This patch will be messy unless someone has some Makefile-fu.
2) I modify the kernel-ark-ci scripts to use the dist-* targets.
3) I patch to remove the old rh-* targets which will result in an overall clean
patch.
Would that work for everyone?
This seems unnecessarily messy. Why not modify the CI scripts to check
both and as long as at least one of them passes, CI passes?
Justin