Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Feb 2006 14:44:33 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: quality control |
| |
Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de> wrote: > > Look, it's really simple: lets say I make a change that has to do with > PM, you do a quick compile test with and _without_ PM just to check you > didn't screw anything up with that change. You change reiserfs acl > stuff, you do a quick compile test with and without that configured. > > It's a pretty standard procedure, and contrary to what you think, it > _is_ required before submitting a patch. No one is asking anyone to > check all possible configure options, but the interesting data set is > typically extremely easy to guess looking at a change.
<rofl>
bix:/usr/src/op> find patches -name '*build-fix*' | wc -l 533
bix:/usr/src/op> find patches -name '*fix.patch' | wc -l 5109
A lot of people don't make the slightest effort. But it's not a big problem, really. Silly build errors are reported early and are almost always trivial to fix. The major drawback is that they can wreck a -mm release for many testers.
- 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/
| |