Hi Ingo, On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:14:05 +0100 Ingo Molnar 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/