On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 01:11:28PM -0600, Archaic wrote: > I would think intel/amd is sufficient if even that is necessary. It > would be easy to go overboard on this, though. As for jhalfs versus my > logs, if the test output was separated from the rest, then it is > feasible, other wise we are talking about several megabytes of log files > (just the check output is around 5 MB for the 6.1.1 release). I don't > see the actual benefit though because it's still just a simple make > check > logfile 2&>1. i.e. nothing that requires a special tool, but if > the code to separate out check logs was indeed added to jhalfs, then we > could include others' logs. Some way of verifying that the builds were > strictly by the book would be required, though, and I always use the > previous release built strictly by the book as a standard host system so > that even chapter 5 logs have something to be based on.
I don't really care what scripting method does it, I just liked the idea of archiving the results of several builds. jhalfs might make this very easy and practical. You're right that the test-results only are required. Manuel, any thoughts? -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
