| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfstest failures |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 7 Nov 2013 05:48:48 -0800 |
| Cc: | Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <527B99C3.6090903@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20131106105451.GA31283@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20131106161825.GU1935@xxxxxxx> <527A887F.2030807@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20131107081710.GC25157@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <527B948C.9060905@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20131107132739.GA16608@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <527B99C3.6090903@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 07:46:43AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Would an expected failure be only for tests which are known to be > not-fixed anywhere? Exactly. If you want to be fancy we could allow a drop-in file to override it if you want something for RHEL testing or similar |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: xfstest failures, Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH v3] xfs: fix unlock in xfs_bmap_add_attrfork, Mark Tinguely |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: xfstest failures, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: xfstest failures, Ben Myers |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |