RESOLVED FIXED75855
REGRESSION(r104418): we still need to build against CG on Mac sometimes (Requested by epoger on #webkit). 
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75855
Summary REGRESSION(r104418): we still need to build against CG on Mac sometimes (Requ...
WebKit Review Bot
Reported 2012-01-09 07:06:38 PST
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/104418 broke the build: we still need to build against CG on Mac sometimes (Requested by epoger on #webkit). This is an automatic bug report generated by the sheriff-bot. If this bug report was created because of a flaky test, please file a bug for the flaky test (if we don't already have one on file) and dup this bug against that bug so that we can track how often these flaky tests case pain. "Only you can prevent forest fires." -- Smokey the Bear
Attachments
ROLLOUT of r104418 (8.37 KB, patch)
2012-01-09 07:07 PST, WebKit Review Bot 		no flags
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 1 2012-01-09 07:07:15 PST
Created attachment 121667 [details] ROLLOUT of r104418 Any committer can land this patch automatically by marking it commit-queue+. The commit-queue will build and test the patch before landing to ensure that the rollout will be successful. This process takes approximately 15 minutes. If you would like to land the rollout faster, you can use the following command: webkit-patch land-attachment ATTACHMENT_ID where ATTACHMENT_ID is the ID of this attachment.
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 2 2012-01-09 07:20:14 PST
Comment on attachment 121667 [details] ROLLOUT of r104418 Clearing flags on attachment: 121667 Committed r104460: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/104460>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 3 2012-01-09 07:20:19 PST
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
epoger
Comment 4 2012-01-09 07:34:07 PST
I'm not sure how this rollback got committed... I set it up via sheriffbot, but I thought it would stay at "commit ?" until a committer c+'ed it.
Tony Chang
Comment 5 2012-01-09 10:35:45 PST
(In reply to comment #4) > I'm not sure how this rollback got committed... I set it up via sheriffbot, but I thought it would stay at "commit ?" until a committer c+'ed it. If you look at the history, you'll see that abarth r+ it.
Tony Chang
Comment 6 2012-01-09 10:35:57 PST
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > I'm not sure how this rollback got committed... I set it up via sheriffbot, but I thought it would stay at "commit ?" until a committer c+'ed it. > > If you look at the history, you'll see that abarth r+ it. Err, cq+.
epoger
Comment 7 2012-01-09 10:48:00 PST
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > I'm not sure how this rollback got committed... I set it up via sheriffbot, but I thought it would stay at "commit ?" until a committer c+'ed it. > > > > If you look at the history, you'll see that abarth r+ it. > > Err, cq+. Ah, thank you, Tony. I didn't know there was more history hiding under that history link. Mystery solved.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.