Hi Linus, On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Is linux-next coverage REALLY so weak that it doesn't even test the > default config options, much less any random options? What's the point of > linux-next then? Check the results page of the automated builds I do (http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/linux-next) - I don't think that the compile coverage is weak ... Of course, if people don't read the results ... Those automated builds are done after the release. Before the release, the tree is built for ppc64_defconfig, powerpc allnoconfig, 44x_defconfig for powerpc, allmodconfig for x86_64 and defconfig for i386, sparc and sparc64. All this is mentioned in my release notes every day. > Again, the date on that thing is claimed to be September 19th, although it > was obviously committed later. September 19 (Australian time) was the last linux-next release. I don't know off the top of my head if the particular patch in question was in next-20080919, but it did contain a version of James' post merge patches. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Attachment:
pgp0tatXcYdQx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
