Duncan wrote:
Matti Bickel [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Thu, 10 Aug 2006 23:59:51 +0200:
Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do arch testers need to post `emerge --info` if everything works?
Shouldn't we be able to trust that they have sane CFLAGS,
it does say make it an attachment if it's too long, but how long
is too long?
8K characters (and bugzilla will actually send you to places where the
sun doesn't shine if you try to post something that exceeds this limit).
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
Tach Matti, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID)
Matti Bickel schrieb:
Once there was the idea of putting AT testing system specs somewhere, so
arch devs could actually see what we're running. Is this still needed or
is the number of ATs small enough to keep that in
Tach Jeroen, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID)
Jeroen Roovers schrieb:
I propose the `emerge --info` included in arch testers' comments on
stabilisation bugs should rather be posted as attachments. The AT
comments clog up the bugs and are usually not interesting at all to
Tach Jeroen, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID)
Jeroen Roovers schrieb:
Inlining emerge info in comments bloats the e-mail message to roughly
2.5 times the normal size. I could have spoken out to get AT comments
banned altogether or to urge arches with AT teams to find a
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 04:56:18 + (UTC)
Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even back before it became the in thing, I was posting emerge
--info as attachments, because it simply fit the bill -- bugzy /says/
to put long stuff as attachments. I never did quite understand why
all that admittedly
Tach Jeroen, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID)
Jeroen Roovers schrieb:
One solution might be to open your own AT bug, make the stabilisation
bug depend on it, and use the AT bug to have ATs post their `emerge
info`. Then, when testing and stabilisation is finished for
On 11 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian 'Opfer' Faulhammer) wrote:
Tach Jeroen, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID)
Jeroen Roovers schrieb:
One solution might be to open your own AT bug, make the stabilisation
bug depend on it, and use the AT bug to
Matti Bickel [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Thu, 10 Aug 2006 23:59:51 +0200:
Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why do arch testers need to post `emerge --info` if everything works?
Shouldn't we be able to trust that they have sane CFLAGS, proper
FEATURES,
