From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 22283: regressions - FAIL
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:19:04 +0100
Message-ID: <1386245944.5338.514.camel@Solace>
References: <osstest-22283-mainreport@xen.org>
	<1386235906.20047.11.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3228771720224924184=="
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1386235906.20047.11.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, "xen.org" <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

--===============3228771720224924184==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-GjhTpv/sUCCRR2q4Ehzx"

--=-GjhTpv/sUCCRR2q4Ehzx
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On gio, 2013-12-05 at 09:31 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 19:13 +0000, xen.org wrote:

> 2013-12-04 17:45:01 Z executing ssh ... osstest@10.80.246.74 rm -rf /loca=
l/scratch/osstest/osstest/build.22283.build-armhf && mkdir /local/scratch/o=
sstest/osstest/build.22283.build-armhf
> Warning: Permanently added '10.80.246.74' (RSA) to the list of known host=
s.
> mkdir: cannot create directory `/local/scratch/osstest/osstest/build.2228=
3.build-armhf': No such file or directory
>
So, about these things... Why OSSTest does no create this (and other)
dirs himself if they're not present?

Is that intentional? If yes, is that a form of safety check, a way to
tell the user "hey, perhaps you have something wrong in your config
file"?

If that is the case then, given a bit of attention is necessary when
deploying it anyway, I don't think this buys us that much more "user
friendliness", while it certainly is something annoying. Personally, I
think it should just go ahead...

Regards,
Dario

--=20
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)


--=-GjhTpv/sUCCRR2q4Ehzx
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAlKgbzgACgkQk4XaBE3IOsT5GACgiB1wX52t6X57ZubBn/Vsqr9D
HEoAn0PTwndIgBw3KemuCnyggGmDC0pm
=pclm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-GjhTpv/sUCCRR2q4Ehzx--


--===============3228771720224924184==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

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

--===============3228771720224924184==--