From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com
Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 35810: regressions - FAIL
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 09:49:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1425462561.25940.94.camel@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54F6CD9A0200007800066091@mail.emea.novell.com>
On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 08:17 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 04.03.15 at 04:26, <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > flight 35810 xen-unstable real [real]
> > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/35810/
> >
> > Regressions :-(
> >
> > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> > including tests which could not be run:
> > test-amd64-amd64-rumpuserxen-amd64 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-amd64-libvirt 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-amd64-xl-pvh-intel 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-rhel6hvm-intel 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-qemut-rhel6hvm-amd 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-qemut-rhel6hvm-intel 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-amd 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-freebsd10-i386 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-winxpsp3 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-winxpsp3-vcpus1 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-winxpsp3 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-xl-qemuu-ovmf-amd64 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-amd64-xl-winxpsp3 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-xl-qemut-winxpsp3-vcpus1 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-i386-xl-winxpsp3 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
> > test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemut-winxpsp3 5 xen-boot fail REGR. vs. 34629
>
> The several ones I looked at all have an undue delay after
> "Starting MTA:", which I assume was related to some
> infrastructure issue (and hence we should disregard).
Looks a lot like the old NTP issue, which was supposed to have been
fixed, but perhaps our internal NTP isn't especially more reliable than
the old pool.debian.org ones we were using before.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-04 9:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-04 3:26 [xen-unstable test] 35810: regressions - FAIL xen.org
2015-03-04 8:17 ` Jan Beulich
2015-03-04 9:49 ` Ian Campbell [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1425462561.25940.94.camel@citrix.com \
--to=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.