On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 08:37:49AM +, Alex Bennée wrote:
>
> David Gibson writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 02:23:28PM +, Alex Bennée wrote:
> >> We only ran make check once before it used to be an unreliable target.
> >> It was only a stop gap measure and we should be able to revert
David Gibson writes:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 02:23:28PM +, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> We only ran make check once before it used to be an unreliable target.
>> It was only a stop gap measure and we should be able to revert it now.
>> This also stops us needing a large all-MMU build.
>>
>> We di
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 02:23:28PM +, Alex Bennée wrote:
> We only ran make check once before it used to be an unreliable target.
> It was only a stop gap measure and we should be able to revert it now.
> This also stops us needing a large all-MMU build.
>
> We disable "make check" for a coupl
We only ran make check once before it used to be an unreliable target.
It was only a stop gap measure and we should be able to revert it now.
This also stops us needing a large all-MMU build.
We disable "make check" for a couple of the extra config targets which
are currently broken.
Signed-off-b
