Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-15 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 15.01.15 at 16:06, wrote: > On 15/01/15 14:53, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 15.01.15 at 15:14, wrote: >>> But I think I made a wrong assumption above regarding the >>> guest size: test-amd64-i386-xl-win7-amd64 produces a 64-bit >>> guest with a 32-bit tool stack, so the crucial part of all

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-15 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 15/01/15 14:53, Jan Beulich wrote: On 15.01.15 at 15:14, wrote: >> But I think I made a wrong assumption above regarding the >> guest size: test-amd64-i386-xl-win7-amd64 produces a 64-bit >> guest with a 32-bit tool stack, so the crucial part of all the >> tests failing is not the guest's

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-15 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 15.01.15 at 15:14, wrote: > But I think I made a wrong assumption above regarding the > guest size: test-amd64-i386-xl-win7-amd64 produces a 64-bit > guest with a 32-bit tool stack, so the crucial part of all the > tests failing is not the guest's bitness, but tool stack's. So I'll > next l

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-15 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 14.01.15 at 12:37, wrote: On 14.01.15 at 12:22, wrote: >> On 14/01/15 10:52, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 14.01.15 at 11:33, wrote: flight 33399 xen-unstable real [real] http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/33399/ Regressions :-( Tests which

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-14 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 14/01/15 11:37, Jan Beulich wrote: On 14.01.15 at 12:22, wrote: >> On 14/01/15 10:52, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 14.01.15 at 11:33, wrote: flight 33399 xen-unstable real [real] http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/33399/ Regressions :-( Tests w

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-14 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 14.01.15 at 12:22, wrote: > On 14/01/15 10:52, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 14.01.15 at 11:33, wrote: >>> flight 33399 xen-unstable real [real] >>> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/33399/ >>> >>> Regressions :-( >>> >>> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, >>> incl

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-14 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 14/01/15 10:52, Jan Beulich wrote: On 14.01.15 at 11:33, wrote: >> flight 33399 xen-unstable real [real] >> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/33399/ >> >> Regressions :-( >> >> Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, >> including tests which could not be run: >> test

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-14 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 14.01.15 at 11:33, wrote: > flight 33399 xen-unstable real [real] > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/33399/ > > Regressions :-( > > Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, > including tests which could not be run: > test-amd64-i386-freebsd10-amd64 8 guest-start

[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 33399: regressions - FAIL

2015-01-14 Thread xen . org
flight 33399 xen-unstable real [real] http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~xensrcts/logs/33399/ Regressions :-( Tests which did not succeed and are blocking, including tests which could not be run: test-amd64-i386-freebsd10-amd64 8 guest-startfail REGR. vs. 33112 test-amd64-i386-xl-q