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

samples: smp_svr: fix overlay file #20033

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 23, 2025
Merged

Conversation

juhaylinen
Copy link
Contributor

Fix include path in nrf9160dk_nrf52840_recovery.overlay file.
Enable mcuboot shell.

Fix include path in nrf9160dk_nrf52840_recovery.overlay file.
Enable mcuboot shell.

Signed-off-by: Juha Ylinen <[email protected]>
@juhaylinen juhaylinen requested review from a team as code owners January 22, 2025 13:45
@github-actions github-actions bot added the changelog-entry-required Update changelog before merge. Remove label if entry is not needed or already added. label Jan 22, 2025
@NordicBuilder
Copy link
Contributor

NordicBuilder commented Jan 22, 2025

CI Information

To view the history of this post, clich the 'edited' button above
Build number: 1

Inputs:

Sources:

sdk-nrf: PR head: 717c59d0d3a1856a31f2365be162abaa15c271f6

more details

sdk-nrf:

PR head: 717c59d0d3a1856a31f2365be162abaa15c271f6
merge base: 1e301e40ae1d342703b1226979dce15e8690716c
target head (main): 47c18832e293d6f3e11b91c753ce436e62a46265
Diff

Github labels

Enabled Name Description
ci-disabled Disable the ci execution
ci-all-test Run all of ci, no test spec filtering will be done
ci-force-downstream Force execution of downstream even if twister fails
ci-run-twister Force run twister
ci-run-zephyr-twister Force run zephyr twister
List of changed files detected by CI (2)
samples
│  ├── cellular
│  │  ├── smp_svr
│  │  │  ├── nrf9160dk_nrf52840_recovery.overlay
│  │  │  │ prj.conf

Outputs:

Toolchain

Version: 342151af73
Build docker image: docker-dtr.nordicsemi.no/sw-production/ncs-build:342151af73_912848a074

Test Spec & Results: ✅ Success; ❌ Failure; 🟠 Queued; 🟡 Progress; ◻️ Skipped; ⚠️ Quarantine

  • ◻️ Toolchain - Skipped: existing toolchain is used
  • ✅ Build twister
    • sdk-nrf test count: 220
  • ✅ Integration tests
Disabled integration tests
    • desktop52_verification
    • doc-internal
    • test_ble_nrf_config
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-apps
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-ble_mesh
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-ble_samples
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-boot
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-chip
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-fem
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nfc
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_libmodem-nrf
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_lwm2m
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_mosh
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_positioning
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_samples
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_serial_lte_modem
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_thingy91
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_zephyr_lwm2m
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf_crypto
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-ps
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-rpc
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-rs
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-tfm
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-thread
    • test-fw-nrfconnect-zigbee
    • test-low-level
    • test-sdk-audio
    • test-sdk-dfu
    • test-sdk-find-my
    • test-sdk-mcuboot
    • test-sdk-pmic-samples
    • test-sdk-sidewalk
    • test-sdk-wifi
    • test-secdom-samples-public

Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the CI

Copy link
Contributor

@eivindj-nordic eivindj-nordic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should this have a changelog entry?

@SeppoTakalo
Copy link
Contributor

Should this have a changelog entry?

I think no, because this is fixing something that was already working previously. Not all bugs deserve mention on the changelog. Only those that are relevant to customers.

@SeppoTakalo SeppoTakalo merged commit 2e5b641 into nrfconnect:main Jan 23, 2025
13 checks passed
@SeppoTakalo SeppoTakalo removed the changelog-entry-required Update changelog before merge. Remove label if entry is not needed or already added. label Jan 23, 2025
@eivindj-nordic
Copy link
Contributor

Should this have a changelog entry?

I think no, because this is fixing something that was already working previously. Not all bugs deserve mention on the changelog. Only those that are relevant to customers.

Agreed, just wanted to check as the changelog-entry-required label was set.

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.

4 participants