Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.6-testing test] 64270: regressions
- FAIL"):
> On 16.11.15 at 13:01, wrote:
> > I think if the 4.6 release cycle is at a suitable point we should backport
> > the Cofnig.mk change to switch to the combined trees. If that w
>>> On 16.11.15 at 13:01, wrote:
> I think if the 4.6 release cycle is at a suitable point we should backport
> the Cofnig.mk change to switch to the combined trees. If that would be
> inappropriate right now then pushing the tags by hand to the old tree would
> be ok.
Backporting would seem fine
On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 04:56 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 15.11.15 at 10:26, wrote:
> > flight 64270 xen-4.6-testing real [real]
> > http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/64270/
> >
> > Regressions :-(
> >
> > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> > including tests w
>>> On 15.11.15 at 10:26, wrote:
> flight 64270 xen-4.6-testing real [real]
> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/64270/
>
> Regressions :-(
>
> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
> including tests which could not be run:
> build-amd64-prev 5 xen-build
flight 64270 xen-4.6-testing real [real]
http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/64270/
Regressions :-(
Tests which did not succeed and are blocking,
including tests which could not be run:
build-amd64-prev 5 xen-build fail REGR. vs. 63449
build-i386-prev
