On 26/04/2024 15.46, Eldon Stegall wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 02:47:20PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
With regards to NetBSD and OpenBSD, this is not a step backward since these
gitlab jobs were never run anyway (they could only be triggered manually,
but hardly anybody did that AFAIK).
If we
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 02:47:20PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> With regards to NetBSD and OpenBSD, this is not a step backward since these
> gitlab jobs were never run anyway (they could only be triggered manually,
> but hardly anybody did that AFAIK).
>
> If we want to have proper support for t
On 26/04/2024 14.30, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 at 12:38, Thomas Huth wrote:
During the past months, the netbsd and openbsd jobs in the Cirrus-CI
were broken most of the time - the setup to run a BSD in KVM on Cirrus-CI
from gitlab via the cirrus-run script was very fragile, and
On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 at 12:38, Thomas Huth wrote:
>
> During the past months, the netbsd and openbsd jobs in the Cirrus-CI
> were broken most of the time - the setup to run a BSD in KVM on Cirrus-CI
> from gitlab via the cirrus-run script was very fragile, and since the
> jobs were not run by defau
During the past months, the netbsd and openbsd jobs in the Cirrus-CI
were broken most of the time - the setup to run a BSD in KVM on Cirrus-CI
from gitlab via the cirrus-run script was very fragile, and since the
jobs were not run by default, it used to bitrot very fast.
Now Cirrus-CI also introdu
