From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ewan Mellor <ewan@xensource.com>
Subject: Re: Daily Xen Builds
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 23:41:57 +0100
Message-ID: <20051013224157.GC21050@leeni.uk.xensource.com>
References: <1129142873.5982.12.camel@dbarrera_tp> <8764s2edei.fsf@us.ibm.com>
	<1129231660.5978.60.camel@dbarrera_tp> <87ek6p8b0m.fsf@us.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87ek6p8b0m.fsf@us.ibm.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 12:36:25PM -0700, Dan Smith wrote:

> 
> DB> Are we seeing fewer failure? It appears to be similar, or slightly
> DB> more.
> 
> Mostly what I meant was that there are fewer FAILs and more XFAILs,
> which there are.  Also, on my machines, I'm seeing almost no
> unexpected failures.  See my machine's latest report:
> 
>   http://xmtest.dague.org/cgi-bin/display?view=single&testid=99

Looking at this test result, I think that 07_attach_baddevice_neg and
08_attach_bad_filedevice_neg are going to stay XFAIL for some time, but the
patch that I gave you today should sort out the other failures, which will
mean that we pass every other test in your suite.  Which is nice.

This applies to 32-bit, non-PAE, non-SMP Xen -- other architectures will have
different results, at the moment.

Ewan.