From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:02:03 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [autobuild.buildroot.net] Build results for 2012-06-13 In-Reply-To: References: <20120614063146.7563852CEB3@lolut.humanoidz.org> <20120615101917.2c757be3@skate> Message-ID: <20120615170203.6bc1e19a@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Le Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:57:42 -0300, Milton Soares Filho a ?crit : > Perhaps including another field at the summary just to tell the type > of the toolchain would be enough. The use-case is filter-out > configurations where other users can not easily reproduce the > conditions whether the build has failed, such as custom external > toolchains provided by third-parties or paid-for development kits. None of the toolchains that are currently being used for the autobuild tests are private toolchains. They are either: * Publicly available CodeSourcery toolchains * Publicly available Linaro toolchains * Toolchains built with Crosstool-NG * Toolchains built with Buildroot I think we should rather document how to get or build those toolchains, or even make them available (easy for CodeSourcery, Linaro and Crosstool-NG, more complicated for Buildroot toolchains since those toolchains are not relocatable as of today). Since about 90% of the builds are done with external toolchains, simply filtering out all test cases done with external toolchains will just leave you with only a few test builds. Regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com