| Issue 2282: | gerrit server 'remote reject' | |
| 2 people starred this issue and may be notified of changes. | Back to list |
************************************************************ ***** NOTE: THIS BUG TRACKER IS FOR GERRIT CODE REVIEW ***** ***** DO NOT SUBMIT BUGS FOR CHROME, ANDROID, INTERNAL ***** ***** ISSUES WITH YOUR COMPANY'S GERRIT SETUP, ETC. ***** ***** THOSE ISSUE BELONG IN DIFFERENT ISSUE TRACKERS! ***** ************************************************************ Affected Version: 1.8b3 What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. git log on personal branch system/core, rebased: commit 63694565d17690365ac0b0cd9e8131fbcb4c6328 Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 12:39:43 2013 -0800 liblog: Add liblog test suite Change-Id: Ia6d6821e8546e0eccacab812d39d529ea0372c6a commit 76a494521d5a1fd026e870d31c98162b68f1ef9d Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 10:55:48 2013 -0800 logcat: Incorporate liblog reading API Change-Id: I1e1a55d13ac55350e8d54bfe92b392de07f26a5d commit 7305af1e2bfe56fbf9f503fd0891028b3c25e8d6 Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 10:53:34 2013 -0800 debuggerd: Incorporate liblog reading API Change-Id: Ic26e9dba3b45c827d122b03e34cc4a5bd48f7deb commit e23db74fc10ae30e3a5268b13ab6a9241a804fcb Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 10:52:58 2013 -0800 adb: Incorporate liblog reading API Change-Id: Idfd17afaa06bfb597bff63e160882a2a21fe0725 commit d153288cfe8212950a92571301b0d923d3faa86a Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 10:50:27 2013 -0800 liblog: Interface to support abstracting log read Change-Id: Iedc55c1316029b4bb72f51cc656b53b0e3f90aee commit 0c0c707192e090e00e1470e7cce7b661d665f587 Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 07:54:30 2013 -0800 liblog: whitespace fixes - change cutils to liblog directory path - change tabs to spaces Change-Id: I7d9db1e2b817ba0ec9a224340c5c7535a2387fd5 commit bac4752dae1e4c87a0656603eb4e95d31bb0e663 Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 07:47:35 2013 -0800 libsysutils: Get rid of acceptable warnings - UNUSED argument warnings - Remove LOG_NDEBUG define Change-Id: I48b0942adfdb7a46a7693e580bc6ed5a685b0d5b commit 79b90711ff4fb9128df4546e943294f684de9622 Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 07:38:46 2013 -0800 libcutils: bug str_parms.c::str_parms_get_float(). str_parms_get_float did not return the output into *val. Only output if returning with no error. Audit shows no internal users of this library function Change-Id: I14a3f08a098072a159dd93f85ead36b3f445816f commit 089a6eb1e3974ca2adf7f93091e716ab425262a3 Author: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@google.com> Date: Fri Nov 22 07:36:45 2013 -0800 libcutils: acceptable UNUSED argument warnings Change-Id: Ie427d481298af8d911bb2b157ebba30954335354 commit 7d2db03ef7eb12fdf33562c37d47f803b32c12f1 2. repo upload . 3. Fails with remote rejected, not enough explanation. What is the expected output? (no upload failure) What do you see instead? salyzyn@virago:/ssd/liblog-test/system/core$ repo upload . Upload project system/core/ to remote branch master: branch liblog-test ( 9 commits, Tue Nov 26 17:14:09 2013 -0800): 089a6eb1 libcutils: acceptable UNUSED argument warnings 79b90711 libcutils: bug str_parms.c::str_parms_get_float(). bac4752d libsysutils: Get rid of acceptable warnings 0c0c7071 liblog: whitespace fixes d153288c liblog: Interface to support abstracting log read e23db74f adb: Incorporate liblog reading API 7305af1e debuggerd: Incorporate liblog reading API 76a49452 logcat: Incorporate liblog reading API 63694565 liblog: Add liblog test suite to https://googleplex-android-review.googlesource.com/ (y/N)? y ATTENTION: You are uploading an unusually high number of commits. YOU PROBABLY DO NOT MEAN TO DO THIS. (Did you rebase across branches?) If you are sure you intend to do this, type 'yes': yes Counting objects: 81, done. Delta compression using up to 32 threads. Compressing objects: 100% (57/57), done. Writing objects: 100% (57/57), 19.45 KiB | 0 bytes/s, done. Total 57 (delta 39), reused 0 (delta 0) remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (39/39) remote: Processing changes: refs: 1, done remote: (W) 0c0c707: no files changed, was rebased remote: (W) No changes between prior commit f7f36a4 and new commit 089a6eb remote: remote: Updated Changes: remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/391999 remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/391998 remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/392010 remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/391997 remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/392011 remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/392012 remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/391995 remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/392013 remote: https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/393047 remote: To persistent-https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/p/platform/system/core ! [remote rejected] liblog-test -> refs/for/master (no changes made) error: failed to push some refs to 'persistent-https://googleplex-android-review.git.corp.google.com/p/platform/system/core' ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [FAILED] system/core/ liblog-test (Upload failed) salyzyn@virago:/ssd/liblog-test/system/core$ Please provide any additional information below. Believe I14a3f08a098072a159dd93f85ead36b3f445816f is the cause because problems started with that one after a rebase and reported the first upload error. In an effort to bypass I abandoned the 'old one' and made a new one with (this) new Change-Id.
Nov 27, 2013
Project Member
#1
david.pu...@sonymobile.com
Nov 27, 2013
Thanks, that clears it up. Dropped a ':' to change the comment and voila! If this is an enforced policy, then ignore the following comment. If the code is changed (rebase to incorporate an adjustment as a result of a review comment) one would expect Gerrit to detect this and either interactively request the user to be sure, or to take the content.
Nov 27, 2013
I managed to recollect better the procedure to reproduce this: 1) upload content 2) rebase with new comment and new changeid (I believe I deleted the change id portion of the comment) 3) upload content 4) rebase with no comment change, but code fix, again with new changeid (oops again) 5) upload content 6) rebase with no comment change, but alter the changeid to the correct value (I am getting smarter every day :-) ) 7) make changes elsewhere in other patches, rebase. 8) upload content, upload failed. From this I can intuit that the comment change has the changeid stripped before making the comparison. The change request to Gerrit would be that it should also add the changeid into the list of adjustments it accepts; or is *this* a matter of policy?
Dec 9, 2015
In case the change is not chained such that there is no child commit, then this behaviour is impeccable. However, when the impacted change has a child or more, then it becomes problematic because the chained children commits are all blocked by this behaviour.
Dec 10, 2015
this is a duplicate of Issue 1867 (and 1920, and 2008, and ...), no? i didn't read the all very closely. |
|
| ► Sign in to add a comment |