multipass icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
multipass copied to clipboard

utils: fix deprecated initalization of QFD::Permissions

Open Saviq opened this issue 3 years ago • 1 comments

Saviq avatar Aug 10 '22 14:08 Saviq

Codecov Report

Merging #2699 (533b631) into main (becdbe0) will increase coverage by 0.00%. The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2699   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   86.64%   86.65%           
=======================================
  Files         218      218           
  Lines       10981    11001   +20     
=======================================
+ Hits         9515     9533   +18     
- Misses       1466     1468    +2     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
include/multipass/utils.h 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/simplestreams/simple_streams_manifest.cpp 94.50% <0.00%> (-2.11%) :arrow_down:
src/daemon/custom_image_host.cpp 97.61% <0.00%> (-0.89%) :arrow_down:
src/client/cli/cmd/launch.cpp 88.95% <0.00%> (+3.93%) :arrow_up:

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

codecov[bot] avatar Aug 10 '22 15:08 codecov[bot]

Build failed:

bors[bot] avatar Aug 12 '22 19:08 bors[bot]

Grr, try again...

bors retry

townsend2010 avatar Aug 12 '22 19:08 townsend2010

Build failed:

bors[bot] avatar Aug 12 '22 23:08 bors[bot]

Try again...

bors retry

townsend2010 avatar Aug 15 '22 12:08 townsend2010

Build failed:

bors[bot] avatar Aug 15 '22 14:08 bors[bot]

bors retry

townsend2010 avatar Aug 17 '22 01:08 townsend2010

Build failed:

bors[bot] avatar Aug 17 '22 04:08 bors[bot]

One more time...

bors retry

townsend2010 avatar Aug 17 '22 15:08 townsend2010

Build failed:

bors[bot] avatar Aug 17 '22 17:08 bors[bot]

Ok, gonna try one last time, then I'm going to merge it manually. I mean it bors, I'll merge it manually if you don't get your act together. I'm warning you!!!!!

bors retry

townsend2010 avatar Aug 18 '22 12:08 townsend2010

Build failed:

bors[bot] avatar Aug 18 '22 15:08 bors[bot]

Running bors to get the merge commit and will manually merge.

townsend2010 avatar Aug 18 '22 19:08 townsend2010

bors retry

townsend2010 avatar Aug 18 '22 19:08 townsend2010

bors cancel

townsend2010 avatar Aug 18 '22 19:08 townsend2010

Canceled.

bors[bot] avatar Aug 18 '22 19:08 bors[bot]

Running bors to get the merge commit and will manually merge.

IMO that's excessive, it's easy enough to craft that commit yourself, and it doesn't then cheat that bors, indeed, merged it. But if you decide to go for it anyway, you can just push to master, bors will cancel itself. Note that doesn't, on its own, cancel the CI runs that trigger on a push to staging.

Saviq avatar Aug 19 '22 07:08 Saviq

IMO that's excessive, it's easy enough to craft that commit yourself, and it doesn't then cheat that bors, indeed, merged it.

Ok, that's fair.

...you can just push to ~master~main, bors will cancel itself.

When I did push to main, bors kept running until I explicitly told bors to cancel. Perhaps it takes a while for the manually merge to be noticed?

Note that doesn't, on its own, cancel the CI runs that trigger on a push to staging.

Right. I went to the running Workflows and tried multiple times to cancel, but I don't think Github Actions honors the cancel all of the time.

townsend2010 avatar Aug 19 '22 11:08 townsend2010

When I did push to main, bors kept running until I explicitly told bors to cancel. Perhaps it takes a while for the manually merge to be noticed?

Hmm. Maybe. Or maybe it notices HEAD changes, but not base? (at least not until it fails to push).

Right. I went to the running Workflows and tried multiple times to cancel, but I don't think Github Actions honors the cancel all of the time.

The problem is the if: bit in steps. If it says always() (as it needs to, if you want it to run despite skipping previous a step), that step won't be cancelled… I tried to fix all the cases to have always() && !cancelled(), but may have missed some - and I'm not clear on whether that would mean it does get cancelled…

Saviq avatar Aug 19 '22 11:08 Saviq

You would think if someone wants to cancel a workflow run, they just want it to stop period (like kill -9 the whole thing) and not care about subsequent steps :shrug:

townsend2010 avatar Aug 19 '22 11:08 townsend2010

You would think if someone wants to cancel a workflow run, they just want it to stop period (like kill -9 the whole thing) and not care about subsequent steps shrug

Well, that allows you to do cleanup. Like in the Testflinger case, that gives me a chance to cancel running jobs

Saviq avatar Aug 19 '22 11:08 Saviq

But what is crazy, is the implicit if: success(), which only gets overridden if you have always() in your condition. Otherwise it just gets app&&ed…

Saviq avatar Aug 19 '22 11:08 Saviq