lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Add rdc321x defconfig file

* Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org> wrote:

> > so if an arguably sane testing method "only" works on x86 then the
> > right solution is to fix the other architectures to be sanely
> > testable too.
>
> If you want to fix them I won't stop you...
>
> Until they are fixed I'm staying at using the defconfigs.

As i said it before, it's totally senseless to add zillions of
defconfigs to x86. The two that are there should be enough for a
sniff-test - and much more than that has to be done to ensure that a
patch doesnt break anything. Not even a 100 defconfigs would match
proper randconfig coverage.

according to one particular arbitrary piece of metrics [1], ~99.15% of
our testers use x86 - and the oopses collected on kerneloops.org show a
similar proportion.

> > I've seen architectures that were build-tested for the _first time_
> > at around 2.6.24-rc8...
>
> That can't be true.
>
> Can you name what architectures you think of and why you think noone
> tried to compile them before?

sorry, s/build-tested/boot-tested.

there's been only 6 commits to arch/v850 between v2.6.23 and v2.6.24.
None of them seems to suggest that anyone ever tested v850 in the last
year or so.

Ingo

[1] http://smolt.fedoraproject.org


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-25 14:49    [W:0.055 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site