From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Qcbxb-0003Aj-OJ for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 13:32:35 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p61BSq4X010099 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:28:52 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09646-08 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:28:48 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p61BShRv010093 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:28:43 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: References: <4E0D062C.5060302@linux.intel.com> <2B6421C4-E7C5-42FB-B46F-AAFAE85DB7F2@dominion.thruhere.net> <1309507826.20015.509.camel@rex> Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 12:28:21 +0100 Message-ID: <1309519701.20015.519.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: It's broken, please revert. Re: [PATCH 0/4 V4] Share gcc work directories X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 11:32:35 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 11:08 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > Op 1 jul 2011, om 10:10 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > > > On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 09:15 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > >> Op 1 jul 2011, om 01:26 heeft Saul Wold het volgende geschreven: > > Testing patches is not the sole responsibility of myself and Saul. This > > gcc patchset was on the mailing list for a considerable time and has > > been tested in a variety of ways. Various breakage was identified found > > and those breakages were fixed. The fact there looks to be some > > incremental build issue with rm_work is unfortunate and likely easy to > > fix so I think this request is a little out of proportion. > > > > If someone had reported the problem before it merged it would have > > waited until it was fixed before merging. > > "They will therefore merge and I'm happy with them but it will be a few > more days before that happens. " > > I was under the impression that I still had a few more days to test > them now that the eglibc problems have been solved. I don't think you > can blame people for not testing gcc when eglibc was still blowing up > in their faces. I balanced a few different factors in the timing. Merging code like this on a Friday with 4th July and the US going on holiday next week didn't seem like a better time to do this so I went for something slightly earlier. I was working on the assumption we had the eglibc issues resolved. > > I find it ironic you're one of the people asking to turn the autobuilder > > red, make warnings fatal and break things for everyone as 'its the only > > way to get people to look at and fix them; but on the other hand you're > > unhappy if testing of patches doesn't happen on every single combination > > of usages and something does break :/. > > I was actually planning to test them today, now that eglibc works again. Ok, sorry I wasn't aware of that. Cheers, Richard