Fwd: Patches sent to Binutils list appear to be delayed and some missing

* Fwd: Patches sent to Binutils list appear to be delayed and some missing
       [not found] <a5ca060e-4c0a-49ee-8fd4-745f5a859bf2@linux.ibm.com>
@ 2024-06-25 10:55 ` Nick Clifton
  2024-06-26 20:42   ` Frank Ch. Eigler
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Nick Clifton @ 2024-06-25 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Overseers mailing list; +Cc: Jens Remus

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread