From: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
To: Overseers mailing list <overseers@sourceware.org>
Cc: Jens Remus <jremus@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Fwd: Patches sent to Binutils list appear to be delayed and some missing
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 11:55:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57f88388-0b0b-4282-b892-805a4d07e30e@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a5ca060e-4c0a-49ee-8fd4-745f5a859bf2@linux.ibm.com>
Hi Guys,
Jens Remus has been having some problems with emails sent to the binutils list:
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: Patches sent to Binutils list appear to be delayed and some missing
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 12:37:14 +0200
From: Jens Remus <jremus@linux.ibm.com>
> Dear Sourceware mailing list administrator(s),
>
> lately my patches sent to the GNU Binutils mailing list
> (binutils@sourceware.org) seem to take a long time to appear on the
> list. That is they show up the next day. For my latest patch series some
> patches even appear to be missing.
>
> I noticed this with the following two patch series:
>
> - [PATCH 0/2] aarch64: Fixes access to struct aarch64_opnd_info members
> <20240621155013.1423979-1-jremus@linux.ibm.com>
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/thread.html#135007
>
> - [PATCH v4 00/15] sframe: Enhancements to SFrame info generation
> <20240624142334.3283823-1-jremus@linux.ibm.com>
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/thread.html#135056
>
> For the latter it seems patches 1, 6, and 9 still did not make it to the
> list (neither to the archive nor to my inbox). It also seems to cause
> the mailing list archive to get the threading wrong (see links above).
>
> Besides that it caused some confusion with reviewers:
>
> "Finally the title says 01/15, yet by now (about 20 min after the mail
> arrived) I didn't get any further parts of such a 15-patch series.
> Oddly enough [1] doesn't even have this one, yet I don't know how
> often it would be refreshed.
>
> [...]
>
> [1] https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/thread.html "
>
> Could you please investigate the cause? Can you tell whether my mails
> are withheld on your side or whether this is something within IBM's
> e-mail infrastructure? Is there anything I can/need to do to get this
> resolved?
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Jens
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
He sent an email to mailman@sourcware.org but that was rejected:
-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: Patches sent to Binutils list appear to be delayed and some missing
Datum: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 09:37:01 +0000
Von: mailman-owner@server2.sourceware.org
An: jremus@linux.ibm.com
Your message has been rejected, probably because you are not
subscribed to the mailing list and the list's policy is to prohibit
non-members from posting to it. If you think that your messages are
being rejected in error, contact the mailing list owner at
mailman-owner@server2.sourceware.org.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strangely when I checked the archive I did see most of those missing posts:
[PATCH 0/2] aarch64: Fixes access to struct aarch64_opnd_info members
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/135007.html
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/135006.html
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/135005.html
[PATCH v4 00/15] sframe: Enhancements to SFrame info generation
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/135081.html
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-June/135083.html
Patch 06/15 from this series does appear to be missing however.
I am not sure what is going on, but if you could have a look and let
Jens know, that would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers
Nick
next parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-25 10:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <a5ca060e-4c0a-49ee-8fd4-745f5a859bf2@linux.ibm.com>
2024-06-25 10:55 ` Nick Clifton [this message]
2024-06-26 20:42 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2024-06-27 8:52 ` Jens Remus
2024-06-27 14:10 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=57f88388-0b0b-4282-b892-805a4d07e30e@redhat.com \
--to=nickc@redhat.com \
--cc=jremus@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=overseers@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).