From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 3 14:28:05 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0BC31065670; Fri, 3 Feb 2012 14:28:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 728358FC14; Fri, 3 Feb 2012 14:28:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [96.47.65.170]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 179A446B42; Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:28:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9ABEAB924; Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:28:04 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 08:34:53 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.2-CBSD-20110714-p10; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; ) References: <201202022037.q12Kb66S041860@freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca> <4F2B278A.3080502@m5p.com> In-Reply-To: <4F2B278A.3080502@m5p.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201202030834.54072.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:28:04 -0500 (EST) Cc: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?= , George Mitchell , Colin Percival Subject: Re: [releng_8_2 tinderbox] failure on powerpc/powerpc X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 14:28:05 -0000 On Thursday, February 02, 2012 7:17:14 pm George Mitchell wrote: > On 02/02/12 15:37, FreeBSD Tinderbox wrote: > > [... one of three errors it's been reporting repeatedly for days ...] > Talk about a lack of focus! Apparently two or three people have all > recently checked in code without first verifying that it compiled (let > alone ran), or else possibly did not completely commit their changes, > and then absconded to a place where they fail to receive these emails > about the problems. Can someone please either diagnose these errors or > else revert the deficient commits? -- George Mitchell No, it is more that the tinderbox for 8 wasn't actually checking these kernels before (they have been broken since 8.1 and 8.2 were released) and they are on less-used platforms. I do agree it needs to be cleaned up one way or another. Given the reticence to commit changes to release branches, it is probably simpler to mask this via the tinderbox instead. -- John Baldwin