| 1 |
On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 16:46 +0200, Jeroen Roovers wrote: |
| 2 |
> N -1 arch dev's comfort against N arch devs' annoyance[1]. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
<big snip> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> [1] Note that I am aware that not all other-arch devs might experience |
| 7 |
> inline `emerge info` for other arches as annoying. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
I am on the alpha, amd64, and x86 arch teams. I have found that even |
| 10 |
emails from architectures I'm not currently looking at tend to have a |
| 11 |
great significance. It seems to me that most of the failures are |
| 12 |
USE-flag related more than architecture specific. As I said, the best |
| 13 |
solution that I can see to do *both* reducing junk and still keeping the |
| 14 |
information inline is to have the ATs only add emerge --info on |
| 15 |
failures, and to just mention the architecture and *relevant" USE on |
| 16 |
success. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
ex. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
gcc 4.1.1 works on x86 with the following: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
USE="gtk nls -bootstrap -build -doc -fortran -gcj -hardened -ip28 |
| 23 |
-ip32r10k -mudflap -multislot -nocxx -objc -objc++ -objc-gc -test |
| 24 |
-vanilla" |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
This still gives us most of the pertinent information without the rest |
| 27 |
of the "spam" of emerge --info. It makes the emails from bugzilla still |
| 28 |
usable for those of us that don't waste the time to open up bugzilla for |
| 29 |
every bug. I do most of my bug management via email. I open the bug |
| 30 |
*only* when I need to comment, or after I've performed the work |
| 31 |
requested. Having to open the bug every time would be a complete waste |
| 32 |
of time for me. Much more so than simply *deleting* an email that |
| 33 |
doesn't pertain to me, or scrolling past unimportant information. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
I would find that this change would be disruptive to my ability to work |
| 36 |
on these architecture teams. As stated before, sometimes another |
| 37 |
architecture's problem can point you at something to test. If a certain |
| 38 |
USE combination doesn't work on x86, wouldn't you want to test it on |
| 39 |
hppa specifically to make sure that it isn't a global issue? I know |
| 40 |
that I sure test any combinations from $other_arches when testing for a |
| 41 |
given $arch, if they've reported a failure. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 45 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 46 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 47 |
Games - Developer |
| 48 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives