| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On 26/05/16 02:12, Matt Turner wrote: |
| 4 |
> Is tatt usable for anyone? Both the 0.3 and 9999 versions seem to hang |
| 5 |
> after printing the Bugnumber: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> # tatt -b 576112 |
| 8 |
> Bugnumber: 576112 |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> CTRL+C gives this traceback: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> ^CTraceback (most recent call last): |
| 13 |
> File "/usr/lib/python-exec/python3.4/tatt", line 135, in <module> |
| 14 |
> bugraw = p1.communicate()[0].decode('utf-8') |
| 15 |
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 947, in communicate |
| 16 |
> stdout = _eintr_retry_call(self.stdout.read) |
| 17 |
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/subprocess.py", line 491, in _eintr_retry_call |
| 18 |
> return func(*args) |
| 19 |
> KeyboardInterrupt |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Sorry, maintenance of tatt has more or less stalled since I'm not |
| 22 |
doing any archtesting myself anymore. I'll investigate, but as |
| 23 |
I've expressed before, I'd be very happy if somebody else would |
| 24 |
want to take over maintenance. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> I've asked multiple times in #gentoo-dev, but the lack of responses |
| 27 |
> indicates to me that no one actually uses it which would be a shame. |
| 28 |
> If it is indeed broken, perhaps we should remove mentions of it from |
| 29 |
> pages such as [1]. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I'm not following IRC, please use bugzilla or the issue tracker |
| 32 |
here https://github.com/tom111/tatt to report bugs. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Cheers, |
| 35 |
Thomas |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> Does anyone successfully use tatt? Are there alternatives to scripting |
| 38 |
> this boring keywording procedure? |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Arch_testing_guide#tatt |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Thomas Kahle |
| 45 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~tomka/ |
Archives