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

add LittleFS part ID #9337

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

add LittleFS part ID #9337

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Jason2866
Copy link
Collaborator

latest IDF 5.1 does support LittleFS and has added its own Partition ID.
This PR updates gen_esp32part.py to latest from commit espressif/esp-idf@2374a0c

@Jason2866 Jason2866 added this to the 3.0.0-RC1 milestone Mar 5, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Mar 5, 2024

Warnings
⚠️

Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR:

  • the commit message "add LittleFS part ID":
    • summary looks empty
    • type/action looks empty

Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips:

  • follow Conventional Commits style
  • correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue
  • allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test
  • sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 20 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter
  • avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers)

TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).

👋 Hello Jason2866, we appreciate your contribution to this project!


Click to see more instructions ...


This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...


We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests.

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
4. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against c169435

@me-no-dev me-no-dev mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2024
@me-no-dev
Copy link
Member

@Jason2866 closing in favor of #9340

Reason is that the tool builder did not run from your PR and as result the windows executable was not generated.

@me-no-dev me-no-dev closed this Mar 5, 2024
@Jason2866 Jason2866 deleted the patch-2 branch March 5, 2024 12:57
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.

3 participants