From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Mike Ralphson" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix t3404 assumption that `wc -l` does not use whitespace. Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 11:16:27 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20080427151610.GB57955@Hermes.local> <20080428094119.GA20499@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20080513091143.GA26248@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Brian Gernhardt" , "Johannes Schindelin" , git@vger.kernel.org To: "Jeff King" , "Junio C Hamano" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 15 12:17:52 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JwaWY-00069g-DR for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 15 May 2008 12:17:22 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753817AbYEOKQd (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2008 06:16:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753867AbYEOKQc (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2008 06:16:32 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.230]:30349 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751699AbYEOKQb (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2008 06:16:31 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id l9so423163rvb.1 for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 03:16:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=y+g6omEGsVwUae0jfmAJmBENtX/LfuuAkUVWVh2mjqw=; b=ecubxreT8GU+XhFEZTDna1DNAMqVtNgj9NiJyUzykPXPpz9cLi+betcfGMXFEkMz/ZvDaGyb8JrwgHPYPFugL/ZRoEi1AShf41QrUTg54KDkEfraU59mROYGZKMvTh9lZ4ACo8i7ke3b8QzjaHRcZfaPV1+IM0fL/J7ufF2CDvo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=uEGa+9IrYNUU+Rpua7ekkHnJUtivYr3P0YYV2CkWCdRjA5a8jxJQrZjtsXr5K+dGzPH4iFkNVpHKSK3t/N6f3KoTUeyJ7Z+IfkHcx1w8RSjU5XccfK8FsGEeRlZmRcDHSVzohnwzgBI06jujDnDbUOIIf9MSqmA56NV5F3u1wXE= Received: by 10.140.163.3 with SMTP id l3mr1037817rve.15.1210846588012; Thu, 15 May 2008 03:16:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.19.11 with HTTP; Thu, 15 May 2008 03:16:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: 2008/5/13 Mike Ralphson : > Thanks - that was a helpful spur to action. I'll check tomorrow how it > fairs pulling, building, running the tests etc. I've added a couple of > 'try git tag -f's to it, so I have KNOWN_BUILDING and KNOWN_PASSING > points to pass quickly into bisect if necessary. My KNOWN_BUILDING and KNOWN_PASSING tags are now happily chasing each other up the commit log. Which branch(es) would it be most useful on which to have this automated build/test cycle? Although the list of tags might get slightly unwieldy (i.e. the top commit will gain a lot of tags if all is well), with a sensible naming convention, these tags could be pushed to a central repo (a regularly updated clone of git.git) allowing easy visibility of the current state of the 'build collective'. Something like {intials}_{uname info}_{branch}_KNOWN_{BUILDING|PASSING} ? Mike