[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B0B1E67.8000207@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:44:39 -0800
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
CC: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, gregkh@...e.de,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for November 23
Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 03:37:46PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi Randy,
>>>
>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:04:39 -0800 Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com> wrote:
>>>> I decided to check on linux-next (only checked x86_64 allmodconfig),
>>>> and viola:
>>>>
>>>> CONFIG_STAGING=y
>>>> CONFIG_STAGING_EXCLUDE_BUILD=y
>>>>
>>>> That is just too helpful. :(
>>> The Kconfig was deliberately done so that the all{no,yes,mod}config
>>> builds don't build the staging stuff. You need to explictly ask for it.
>>> Otherwise I would spend all my time reporting/fixing errors and warnings
>>> in linux-next.
>>>
>> no, you should just drop it after one build error.
>
> No. We've been through this before a while ago. We want the staging
> tree in linux-next to deal with merge issues and to help the developers
> who are contributing to it.
>
> If you want to take it out of your automated randconfig builds because
> it causes you lots of problems, that's fine with me.
Sure, but that's ignoring the real problem that fixes don't get
merged frequently enough, even when they are known & posted.
--
~Randy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists