Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 19:39:00 -0800 From: Garrett Cooper <gcooper@FreeBSD.org> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r217733 - in head: . share/man/man7 Message-ID: <AANLkTimmiLVVQ3y3-tbWG41UDaqQpE51BapKuDdxZP0O@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201101222257.p0MMvSZY007310@svn.freebsd.org> References: <201101222257.p0MMvSZY007310@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz@freebsd.org> wrote: > Author: bz > Date: Sat Jan 22 22:57:28 2011 > New Revision: 217733 > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/217733 > > Log: > =A0Properly document what the top-level `make tinderbox` does. > > =A0Reviewed by: =A0jmallett > =A0MFC After: =A0 =A03 days > =A0X-MFC: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0build.7 only As much as I like make universe and tinderbox, for the purpose of development testing would it make sense if there was a tinderbox target that actually died on its first failure? tinderbox and universe seems to be useful when dealing with known breakage or when executing periodic builds, but I don't know think it's as effective with development testing, as for some of the stuff I just want to build on something other than my host arch and another arch that isn't x86 (say arm, mips, powerpc) just to make sure that I didn't break anything endian wise (if the code is that nasty). Thanks, -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTimmiLVVQ3y3-tbWG41UDaqQpE51BapKuDdxZP0O>