* [gentoo-dev] app-portage/tatt: completely broken?
@ 2016-05-26 0:12 Matt Turner
2016-05-26 8:25 ` Craig Inches
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Matt Turner @ 2016-05-26 0:12 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo development
Is tatt usable for anyone? Both the 0.3 and 9999 versions seem to hang
after printing the Bugnumber:
# tatt -b 576112
Bugnumber: 576112
CTRL+C gives this traceback:
^CTraceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python-exec/python3.4/tatt", line 135, in <module>
bugraw = p1.communicate()[0].decode('utf-8')
File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 947, in communicate
stdout = _eintr_retry_call(self.stdout.read)
File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 491, in _eintr_retry_call
return func(*args)
KeyboardInterrupt
I've asked multiple times in #gentoo-dev, but the lack of responses
indicates to me that no one actually uses it which would be a shame.
If it is indeed broken, perhaps we should remove mentions of it from
pages such as [1].
Does anyone successfully use tatt? Are there alternatives to scripting
this boring keywording procedure?
[1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Arch_testing_guide#tatt
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] app-portage/tatt: completely broken?
2016-05-26 0:12 [gentoo-dev] app-portage/tatt: completely broken? Matt Turner
@ 2016-05-26 8:25 ` Craig Inches
2016-05-26 10:44 ` Thomas Kahle
2016-05-26 11:40 ` Thomas Kahle
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Craig Inches @ 2016-05-26 8:25 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
Hey Matt,
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 1:12 AM, Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Is tatt usable for anyone? Both the 0.3 and 9999 versions seem to hang
> after printing the Bugnumber:
I was using it successfully a few months ago, when I was actively
doing arch testing. So something recently may have broken it.
> # tatt -b 576112
> Bugnumber: 576112
>
> CTRL+C gives this traceback:
>
> ^CTraceback (most recent call last):
> File "/usr/lib/python-exec/python3.4/tatt", line 135, in <module>
> bugraw = p1.communicate()[0].decode('utf-8')
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 947, in communicate
> stdout = _eintr_retry_call(self.stdout.read)
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 491, in _eintr_retry_call
> return func(*args)
> KeyboardInterrupt
>
> I've asked multiple times in #gentoo-dev, but the lack of responses
> indicates to me that no one actually uses it which would be a shame.
> If it is indeed broken, perhaps we should remove mentions of it from
> pages such as [1].
>
> Does anyone successfully use tatt? Are there alternatives to scripting
> this boring keywording procedure?
I dont know of any other alternatives, but I will set tatt up on my
new machine and let you know if I run into the same issues.
> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Arch_testing_guide#tatt
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] app-portage/tatt: completely broken?
2016-05-26 0:12 [gentoo-dev] app-portage/tatt: completely broken? Matt Turner
2016-05-26 8:25 ` Craig Inches
@ 2016-05-26 10:44 ` Thomas Kahle
2016-05-26 11:40 ` Thomas Kahle
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Kahle @ 2016-05-26 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1501 bytes --]
Hi,
On 26/05/16 02:12, Matt Turner wrote:
> Is tatt usable for anyone? Both the 0.3 and 9999 versions seem to hang
> after printing the Bugnumber:
>
> # tatt -b 576112
> Bugnumber: 576112
>
> CTRL+C gives this traceback:
>
> ^CTraceback (most recent call last):
> File "/usr/lib/python-exec/python3.4/tatt", line 135, in <module>
> bugraw = p1.communicate()[0].decode('utf-8')
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 947, in communicate
> stdout = _eintr_retry_call(self.stdout.read)
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 491, in _eintr_retry_call
> return func(*args)
> KeyboardInterrupt
Sorry, maintenance of tatt has more or less stalled since I'm not
doing any archtesting myself anymore. I'll investigate, but as
I've expressed before, I'd be very happy if somebody else would
want to take over maintenance.
> I've asked multiple times in #gentoo-dev, but the lack of responses
> indicates to me that no one actually uses it which would be a shame.
> If it is indeed broken, perhaps we should remove mentions of it from
> pages such as [1].
I'm not following IRC, please use bugzilla or the issue tracker
here https://github.com/tom111/tatt to report bugs.
Cheers,
Thomas
> Does anyone successfully use tatt? Are there alternatives to scripting
> this boring keywording procedure?
>
> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Arch_testing_guide#tatt
>
--
Thomas Kahle
http://dev.gentoo.org/~tomka/
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 496 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] app-portage/tatt: completely broken?
2016-05-26 0:12 [gentoo-dev] app-portage/tatt: completely broken? Matt Turner
2016-05-26 8:25 ` Craig Inches
2016-05-26 10:44 ` Thomas Kahle
@ 2016-05-26 11:40 ` Thomas Kahle
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Kahle @ 2016-05-26 11:40 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1699 bytes --]
On 26/05/16 02:12, Matt Turner wrote:
> Is tatt usable for anyone? Both the 0.3 and 9999 versions seem to hang
> after printing the Bugnumber:
>
> # tatt -b 576112
> Bugnumber: 576112
I can reproduce it. This is most likely due to 'bugz' asking for login
credentials to bugzilla, leading to the python subprocess module
stalling. Something changed here, as in earlier versions (of python?
pybugz?) it would still ask on the shell so that you could see what is
going on.
My solution to this was to recommend an alias
bugz="bugz -u ... -p ..."
which also does not work anymore. So a new solution must be found to
tell bugz the login credentials. I'm working on it in
https://github.com/tom111/tatt/issues/24
Cheers,
Thomas
>
> CTRL+C gives this traceback:
>
> ^CTraceback (most recent call last):
> File "/usr/lib/python-exec/python3.4/tatt", line 135, in <module>
> bugraw = p1.communicate()[0].decode('utf-8')
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 947, in communicate
> stdout = _eintr_retry_call(self.stdout.read)
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 491, in _eintr_retry_call
> return func(*args)
> KeyboardInterrupt
>
> I've asked multiple times in #gentoo-dev, but the lack of responses
> indicates to me that no one actually uses it which would be a shame.
> If it is indeed broken, perhaps we should remove mentions of it from
> pages such as [1].
>
> Does anyone successfully use tatt? Are there alternatives to scripting
> this boring keywording procedure?
>
> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Arch_testing_guide#tatt
>
--
Thomas Kahle
http://dev.gentoo.org/~tomka/
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 496 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-05-26 11:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-05-26 0:12 [gentoo-dev] app-portage/tatt: completely broken? Matt Turner
2016-05-26 8:25 ` Craig Inches
2016-05-26 10:44 ` Thomas Kahle
2016-05-26 11:40 ` Thomas Kahle
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox