2.5.60 cheerleading...

2.5.60 cheerleading...

Post by Timothy D. Witha » Sat, 22 Feb 2003 00:40:09



Sorry about getting back on the thread late was off doing boring
management stuff.

But this is what PLM/STP does but right now it doesn't bother
to send the results to any list.

http://www.osdl.org/projects/26lnxstblztn/results/

Tim



> > Ideally, there should be no waiting around for replies.  The message is
> > sent, he starts whatever build/boot test cycle, checks for replies when
> > he's done and ready to release.  If nothing looks urgent enough to hold
> > it up, then he pushes the release.  I still don't see how this adds any
> > kind of terrible delay.

> Outside suggestions to "improve" Linus's workflow usually fall upon deaf
> ears...

> IMO to accomplish your goals, set up a test box with BitKeeper,
> constantly pulling and testing the latest 2.5.x BK trees.  If they
> crash, send full info to lkml.

> Enough crash messages, and people will know automatically whether or not
> the kernel is good... and Linus didn't have to be bothered at all.

>    Jeff

> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

--

Open Source Development Lab Inc - A non-profit corporation
15275 SW Koll Parkway - Suite H - Beaverton OR, 97006
(503)-626-2455 x11 (office)    (503)-702-2871     (cell)
(503)-626-2436     (fax)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

2.5.60 cheerleading...

Post by Jeff Garzi » Sat, 22 Feb 2003 00:50:09



> Sorry about getting back on the thread late was off doing boring
> management stuff.

> But this is what PLM/STP does but right now it doesn't bother
> to send the results to any list.

> http://www.osdl.org/projects/26lnxstblztn/results/

Neat, thanks for posting the link.

IMO, it would be nice to send results to linux-kernel,
but with a few restrictions:

* just a small email, with only key bits of info.
  URLs would point to more detailed information.
* a constant URL, which describes what the heck the email is all about
  (such as your above URL)
* for now, only bother with "ia32 Default"
* never email more than once a day... even if the bot gets stuck in a
  spamming loop, you need to have something in place to throttle emails.
* only email when state changes:  i.e. PASS->FAIL or FAIL->PASS,
  never PASS->PASS or FAIL->FAIL. [debateable... some may disagree with
  me on this one]

Comments?

        Jeff

P.S. The column headers in your report are broken, for example "ia32
Default" goes to bad link
http://www.osdl.org/projects/plm/def_ia32_default.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

2.5.60 cheerleading...

Post by Timothy D. Witha » Sat, 22 Feb 2003 01:00:14




> > Sorry about getting back on the thread late was off doing boring
> > management stuff.

> > But this is what PLM/STP does but right now it doesn't bother
> > to send the results to any list.

> > http://www.osdl.org/projects/26lnxstblztn/results/

> Neat, thanks for posting the link.

> IMO, it would be nice to send results to linux-kernel,
> but with a few restrictions:

> * just a small email, with only key bits of info.
>   URLs would point to more detailed information.
> * a constant URL, which describes what the heck the email is all about
>   (such as your above URL)
> * for now, only bother with "ia32 Default"
> * never email more than once a day... even if the bot gets stuck in a
>   spamming loop, you need to have something in place to throttle emails.
> * only email when state changes:  i.e. PASS->FAIL or FAIL->PASS,
>   never PASS->PASS or FAIL->FAIL. [debateable... some may disagree with
>   me on this one]

  I'm not a big fan of only on transition as sometimes things
get broken but nothing ever gets reported.  But your suggestions
will be taken and implemented.

Quote:> Comments?

>    Jeff

> P.S. The column headers in your report are broken, for example "ia32
> Default" goes to bad link
> http://www.osdl.org/projects/plm/def_ia32_default.html

--

Open Source Development Lab Inc - A non-profit corporation
15275 SW Koll Parkway - Suite H - Beaverton OR, 97006
(503)-626-2455 x11 (office)    (503)-702-2871     (cell)
(503)-626-2436     (fax)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

1. 2.5.60 cheerleading...

Just to counteract all the 2.5.60 bug reports...

After the akpm wave of compile fixes, I booted 2.5.60-BK on my Wal-Mart
PC [via epia], and ran LTP on it, while also stressing it using
fsx-linux in another window.  The LTP run showed a few minor failures,
but overall 2.5.60-BK is surviving just fine, and with no corruption.

So, it's working great for me :)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

2. I want to burn Cd's under Linux...

3. 2.5.60 - drivers/char/esp.c vs include/linux/serialP.h

4. RH7 Default Fontserver?

5. Strange TCP with 2.5.60

6. a question about file permissions

7. Linux 2.5.60 cciss_scsi.c

8. PAS 16 and SCSI CDROM

9. 2.5.60: .o or .ko for CONFIG_MODVERSIONS?

10. NO BOOT since 2.5.60-bk1

11. 2.5.60 3c509 & net/Space.c problem

12. file write performance drop between 2.5.60 and 2.5.70

13. jfs breakage in 2.5.60