Re: linux-next requirements

[Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1500 bytes --]

Hi Ingo,

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:14:05 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> > [...]  As long as that's the case, linux-next should build on them too.
> 
> No, and IMO linux-next is clearly over-interpreting this bit. Linux is not 
> supposed to build on all architectures. Maybe that's a core bit of a 
> misunderstanding (on either my or on sfr's side) and it should be clarified 
> ...

Well, we have no real problem then.  The only architectures for which a
failure will stop new stuff getting into linux-next are the ones I
personally build while constructing the tree (x86, ppc and sparc).  Once
something is in linux-next, even if it causes a build failure overnight,
I am loath to remove it again as it can cause pain for Andrew (who bases
-mm on linux-next).

I will still report such failures (if I have time to notice them - I
mostly hope that architecture maintainers will have a glance over the
build results themselves) and others do as well but such failures do not
generally cause any actions on my part (except in rare cases I may
actually fix the problem or put a provided fix patch in linux-next).

I would like to add arm to the mix of the architectures I build during
construction, but there is no wide ranging config that builds for arm and
building a few of the configs would just end up taking too much time.

Thanks for clarifying.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]