Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

platform/qemu: fix usage of removed Mount9p #3609

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 13, 2023
Merged

Conversation

jlebon
Copy link
Member

@jlebon jlebon commented Sep 13, 2023

PR #3593 was written and opened before #3428 but merged after it. CI had passed but was not rerun, so this went in. This would be fixed by using a merge bot on this repo that reruns CI before merge (See also https://bors.tech/essay/2017/02/02/pitch/.)

Fixes: d812406 ("kola: Add --qemu-bind-ro")

PR coreos#3593 was written and opened before coreos#3428 but merged after it. CI had
passed but was not rerun, so this went in. This would be fixed by using
a merge bot on this repo that reruns CI before merge (See also
https://bors.tech/essay/2017/02/02/pitch/.)

Fixes: d812406 ("kola: Add `--qemu-bind-ro`")
@dustymabe
Copy link
Member

This would be fixed by using a merge bot on this repo that reruns CI before merge.

I think GH supports this natively now. https://github.blog/changelog/2021-10-27-pull-request-merge-queue-limited-beta/

@dustymabe dustymabe merged commit 45e72e0 into coreos:main Sep 13, 2023
2 checks passed
@jlebon
Copy link
Member Author

jlebon commented Sep 13, 2023

PR #3593 was written and opened before #3428 but merged after it.

This isn't exactly correct. #3593 was opened after, but written as if #3428 hadn't merged. But hopefully it's clear what happened here.

I think GH supports this natively now. github.blog/changelog/2021-10-27-pull-request-merge-queue-limited-beta

Ahh yes, forgot about that. Will have to look into this. There's also Tide of course. The challenge with either is having it work well with CoreOS CI. There's also of course the increased load on our systems. We should discuss it in a tracker issue maybe.

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

Thanks!

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

It's not clear to me that we have this problem often enough that the merge queue overhead is worth it yet.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants