On 27 June 2011 19:40, James Westby wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 11:06:08 +0300, Fathi Boudra
> wrote:
>> Yes. 3 consecutive days without any glitches.
>> +1 on my side.
>
> Fathi,
>
> Do you want to switch this week? (I can't tell you exactly when we can
> switch as it relies on the availabilit
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 11:06:08 +0300, Fathi Boudra
wrote:
> Yes. 3 consecutive days without any glitches.
> +1 on my side.
Fathi,
Do you want to switch this week? (I can't tell you exactly when we can
switch as it relies on the availability of an IS sysadmin to make the
changes.)
Were you planni
On 24 June 2011 17:19, James Westby wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 12:06:46 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
>> can we somehow smoke test the infrastructure continuously till
>> tomorrow and then reassess tomorrow afternoon?
>
> We didn't add any extra stress, but all everything has been built twice
>
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:19 AM, James Westby wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 12:06:46 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
>> can we somehow smoke test the infrastructure continuously till
>> tomorrow and then reassess tomorrow afternoon?
>
> We didn't add any extra stress, but all everything has been bui
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 12:06:46 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> can we somehow smoke test the infrastructure continuously till
> tomorrow and then reassess tomorrow afternoon?
We didn't add any extra stress, but all everything has been built twice
now with no builder issues. Do we have the confidence
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 14:28:42 +0200, Alexander Sack wrote:
> couldn't we inject a big amount of test builds in the queue to achieve
> full utilization for 24 or 48 hours or so? of course, queuing them as
> low priority so they don't make our "real" builds the cycles. Lets see
> what james says ;).
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> On 23 June 2011 10:06, Alexander Sack wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:16 PM, James Westby
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:04:41 +, Fathi Boudra
>>> wrote:
> If not, what are the blockers to doing so?
Today, t
On 23 June 2011 10:06, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:16 PM, James Westby
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:04:41 +, Fathi Boudra
>> wrote:
>>> > If not, what are the blockers to doing so?
>>>
>>> Today, the builders are unstable.
>>
>> They have just had new hard disk
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:16 PM, James Westby wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:04:41 +, Fathi Boudra
> wrote:
>> > If not, what are the blockers to doing so?
>>
>> Today, the builders are unstable.
>
> They have just had new hard disk enclosures added, and should be more
> stable now. Let's
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:04:41 +, Fathi Boudra
wrote:
> > If not, what are the blockers to doing so?
>
> Today, the builders are unstable.
They have just had new hard disk enclosures added, and should be more
stable now. Let's monitor for a few days and see if they are more
stable. On what da
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 00:16:27 -0300, Ricardo Salveti
wrote:
> The unhandled fault shouldn't be related with the usb errors. From my
> experience with Beagle xM the USB port will trigger the reset once the
> disk is consuming more power than beagle can provide. As I know this
> is probably a powere
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:56 PM, James Westby wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:04:41 +, Fathi Boudra
> wrote:
>> > If not, what are the blockers to doing so?
>>
>> Today, the builders are unstable. It requires:
>> 1. check the build status everyday as the notifications are broken.
>
> Notifi
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:04:41 +, Fathi Boudra
wrote:
> > If not, what are the blockers to doing so?
>
> Today, the builders are unstable. It requires:
> 1. check the build status everyday as the notifications are broken.
Notifications are now working.
> I can live with this manual steps in
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 20 June 2011 16:10, James Westby wrote:
>> Hi Fathi,
>>
>> Given the results of last week's weekly testing, do you think we should
>> now flip the switch to move to using the images built by
>> ubuntu-build.linaro.org (offspring.li
Hi,
On 20 June 2011 16:10, James Westby wrote:
> Hi Fathi,
>
> Given the results of last week's weekly testing, do you think we should
> now flip the switch to move to using the images built by
> ubuntu-build.linaro.org (offspring.linaro.org as was)?
I tend to say -1.
> If not, what are the blo
15 matches
Mail list logo
