Re: [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-amd64-xl-win7-amd64

[Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1070 bytes --]

On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 16:32 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Which means it might be unrelated from that specific commit (sorry if
> > it's a stupid question, just want to be sure I'm getting things
> > correct :-/ )
> 
> No.  If it fails with 9d1fd58ff602 and succeeds with 32034d1914a6 then
> 9d1fd58ff602 is responsible because 32034d1914a6 is the only parent of
> 9d1fd58ff602.
> 
I see.

> Flights 13095, 13102 and 13105 used code built from from 9d1fd58ff602
> and failed.  These all used the builds from flight 13033, which was
> another bisector run.
> 
> It is possible that the build in 13033 is broken somehow.
>
Well, I couldn't say how that change could affect a non-sedf run
otherwise! :-(

Let's see what future flights will tell us...

Thanks and Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)


[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel