Hudson build is back to normal: 2.HEAD-amd64-CentOS-5.3 #4
See http://build.squid-cache.org/job/2.HEAD-amd64-CentOS-5.3/4/
Hudson build is back to normal: 2.HEAD-i386-FreeBSD-6.4 #2
See http://build.squid-cache.org/job/2.HEAD-i386-FreeBSD-6.4/2/changes
Hudson build is back to normal: 2.HEAD-i386-Debian-sid #2
See http://build.squid-cache.org/job/2.HEAD-i386-Debian-sid/2/changes
Re: assertion: new_mem_lo 0
ons 2009-08-19 klockan 16:15 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries: Henrik, this is the new memory-promotion patch dying. Does not look like the patch, but I will look into it regardless. My first reaction is Why is that assert there?. May well be the case that it should not be asserted. Regards Henrik
Re: assertion: new_mem_lo 0
ons 2009-08-19 klockan 19:20 +0200 skrev Henrik Nordstrom: ons 2009-08-19 klockan 16:15 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries: Henrik, this is the new memory-promotion patch dying. Does not look like the patch, but I will look into it regardless. In fact it was... For some reason I tried to optimize the caller which exposed this fragile point of the cache_mem maintenance when dealing with private objects. Still thinks the assert should go, but that's another day when the cache_mem maintenance is looked over, the current code has room for improvement in both style performance. Regards Henrik
RFC: infrastructure product in bugzilla
I think we should have an infrastructure product in bugzilla, for tracking list/server/buildfarm etc issues. -Rob -- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: RFC: infrastructure product in bugzilla
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:00:15 +1000, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote: I think we should have an infrastructure product in bugzilla, for tracking list/server/buildfarm etc issues. What sort of extra issues exactly are you thinking need to be bug-tracked? We already have websites as a separate 'product' for tracking content errors. IMO, actual build failures can go in as regular FTBS (fail to build). Against the 'test-suite' or 'other' sub-sections of the Squid product. We would need to be careful of this so as not to add duplicates many times over. Amos
Re: RFC: infrastructure product in bugzilla
On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 11:33 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote: On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:00:15 +1000, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote: I think we should have an infrastructure product in bugzilla, for tracking list/server/buildfarm etc issues. What sort of extra issues exactly are you thinking need to be bug-tracked? We already have websites as a separate 'product' for tracking content errors. Oh hmm, perhaps just renaming websites - infrastructure. We have a bunch of services: - smtp - lists - backups? - user accounts on squid-cache.org machines (eu, us, test vms, others?) - VCS - code review And a wide range of webbish services - the CDN - bugzilla (currently xlmrpc doesn't work) - the main site content - patch set generation - wiki -Rob signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Build failed in Hudson: 3.HEAD-i386-OpenBSD-4.5 #1
See http://build.squid-cache.org/job/3.HEAD-i386-OpenBSD-4.5/1/ -- Started by user admin Building remotely on vobsd ERROR: Failed to clone http://www.squid-cache.org/bzr/squid3/trunk/
