Messages in this thread | | | From | Jesper Krogh <> | Subject | Re: Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version | Date | Sat, 23 Jul 2005 09:21:49 +0000 (UTC) |
| |
I gmane.linux.kernel, skrev Blaisorblade: > Forgot drivers testing? That is where most of the bugs are hidden, and where > wide user testing is definitely needed because of the various hardware bugs > and different configurations existing in real world.
A way that could raise the testing upon a particular kernel, would be to provide; (debian example follows): ... example .. An apt-repository with the newest tagged kernel build modular for the architecture.
Just drop all tagged kernels in a common repository that the users can follow, then I'd be happy to test a new kernel on every reboot on my system. I'd probably still would respond if anything was broken in the new kernel..
Then it wouldn't be: "try this patch and see if that solves anything" but do:
apt-get install kernel-image-386-torvalds-linux-2.6-v2.6.13-rc3
(automatically build from the "torvalds/linux-2.6"-branch with tag "v2.6.13-rc3" using a modular kernel-configuration similar to the one used in the stock debian kernels.
Then I find and report something and "Pavel Machek" releases a "try-fix", by tagging a branch ind a tree and tells me to try kernel-image-386-pavel-good-2.6-v2.6.13-rc3 instead.
(and variations.. acip/no-acip smp, etc. etc. )
... example end ..
It would be quite a lot central kernel-building, but as far as I can see, it can be fully automated.
It would defininately lower the barrier for being able to paticipate in testing, but I am not the one to decide if that would be a desirable goal? Or for that matter, worth the work.
Jesper -- ./Jesper Krogh, jesper@krogh.cc, Jabber ID: jesper@jabbernet.dk
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |