This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: PSA: glibc buildbot slave up for aarch64
On Fri, 28 Apr 2017, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On Friday 28 April 2017 09:52 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > Well, you could have an orthogonal measure of port status distinct from
> > "are there regressions yet to be analysed", without hiding new regressions
> > because of an always-present failure.
>
> Hmm, we could do that by marking regressions that we XFAIL with a
> keyword in bz, say testsuite-xfail. If it sounds like a good idea then
> can someone with bz access add a keyword? I can then come up with a
> script to get a report from bz and have it emailed to lic-alpha on a
> weekly basis.
I'm not sure it's even regressions being XFAILed; it's generally tests
that never worked, or never worked on a particular platform (and where
fixing the issue may well require global changes across other toolchain
components and the Linux kernel, e.g. the MIPS XFAIL of check-execstack).
Bug reports to libc-alpha may well be useful, but I don't think "is there
a test in the testsuite for this bug" is a particularly useful criterion
for them. Numbers of open bugs in total and in each component, with how
that changed over the past week / month / year, or a list of recently
opened / reopened bugs, seem like the sort of thing that might be more
helpful for keeping on top of known bug state.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com