Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 12353: tolerable FAIL

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 19.03.12 at 09:44, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 02:44 +0000, xen.org wrote:
>> flight 12353 xen-unstable real [real]
>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/12353/ 
>> 
>> Failures :-/ but no regressions.
>> 
>> Tests which are failing intermittently (not blocking):
>>  build-i386-pvops              4 kernel-build                fail pass in 
>> 12352
>>  build-amd64-pvops             4 kernel-build                fail pass in 
>> 12352
> 
> I thought we had changed things such that *-build were always blocking
> failures? We don't seem to have pushed anything on this occasion but in
> general we wouldn't want to have done so.

Would it really make sense to block hypervisor/tools pushes when
kernel builds fail? There are no shared sources, so the builds should
be completely independent. Of course, it tests can't be run because
of the build failure, that is a blocking reason, but then the question
is whether everything should be built from scratch in the first place
(rather than using pre-existing binaries either from an earlier
successful run of the same tests or from the most recent successful
run against the corresponding tree).

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel