Activity log for bug #1535494

Date Who What changed Old value New value Message
2016-01-19 01:14:07 Serge Hallyn bug added bug
2016-01-19 01:14:17 Serge Hallyn numactl (Ubuntu): importance Undecided Medium
2016-01-19 01:15:08 Serge Hallyn numactl (Ubuntu): status New Triaged
2016-01-19 01:15:16 Serge Hallyn nominated for series Ubuntu Vivid
2016-01-19 01:15:16 Serge Hallyn bug task added numactl (Ubuntu Vivid)
2016-01-19 01:15:16 Serge Hallyn nominated for series Ubuntu Trusty
2016-01-19 01:15:16 Serge Hallyn bug task added numactl (Ubuntu Trusty)
2016-01-19 02:49:53 Launchpad Janitor numactl (Ubuntu): status Triaged Fix Released
2016-02-18 19:53:06 Serge Hallyn description In bug 1358835 we applied a fix to supress a warning. The patch is different from upstream (and appears wrong). In particular, + if (numa_bitmask_isbitset(numa_nodes_ptr, node)) { becomes + if (f) { Switch to a straight cherrypick of the upstream patch. ============================================= SRU Justification same justification as for bug 1358835. It would be great to have the same test cases run as in that bug. ============================================= In bug 1358835 we applied a fix to supress a warning. The patch is different from upstream (and appears wrong). In particular, + if (numa_bitmask_isbitset(numa_nodes_ptr, node)) { becomes + if (f) { Switch to a straight cherrypick of the upstream patch.
2016-02-18 19:55:01 Serge Hallyn description ============================================= SRU Justification same justification as for bug 1358835. It would be great to have the same test cases run as in that bug. ============================================= In bug 1358835 we applied a fix to supress a warning. The patch is different from upstream (and appears wrong). In particular, + if (numa_bitmask_isbitset(numa_nodes_ptr, node)) { becomes + if (f) { Switch to a straight cherrypick of the upstream patch. ============================================= SRU Justification same justification as for bug 1358835. It would be great to have the same test cases run as in that bug. The fix uploaded in that bug is wrong, in particular the diff between the two patches includes: -+ if (f) { ++ if (numa_bitmask_isbitset(numa_nodes_ptr, node)) { "if (f)" is a bogus test, f is simply an opened file. ============================================= In bug 1358835 we applied a fix to supress a warning. The patch is different from upstream (and appears wrong). In particular, + if (numa_bitmask_isbitset(numa_nodes_ptr, node)) { becomes + if (f) { Switch to a straight cherrypick of the upstream patch.
2016-02-18 19:55:14 Serge Hallyn bug added subscriber Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team
2016-02-18 21:09:43 Brian Murray numactl (Ubuntu Vivid): status New Won't Fix
2016-02-18 21:09:50 Brian Murray nominated for series Ubuntu Wily
2016-02-18 21:09:50 Brian Murray bug task added numactl (Ubuntu Wily)
2016-02-18 21:16:47 Brian Murray numactl (Ubuntu Wily): status New Fix Committed
2016-02-18 21:16:50 Brian Murray bug added subscriber SRU Verification
2016-02-18 21:16:58 Brian Murray tags verification-needed
2016-02-18 21:18:34 Brian Murray numactl (Ubuntu Trusty): status New Fix Committed
2016-02-22 18:32:50 Serge Hallyn tags verification-needed verification-done
2016-03-03 19:34:35 Launchpad Janitor numactl (Ubuntu Trusty): status Fix Committed Fix Released
2016-03-03 19:34:43 Brian Murray removed subscriber Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team
2016-03-03 19:35:00 Launchpad Janitor numactl (Ubuntu Wily): status Fix Committed Fix Released