xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfstest failures

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfstest failures
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 08:02:33 -0600
Cc: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20131107140004.GA9489@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20131106105451.GA31283@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20131106194417.GF6188@dastard> <527A9F67.6000208@xxxxxxx> <20131107081634.GB25157@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <527B94A5.20004@xxxxxxx> <527B9C80.4060304@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20131107140004.GA9489@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
On 11/7/13, 8:00 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 07:58:24AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> We had a really high rate of change there for a while, and keeping up on
>> all fronts was tough.
>>
>> There's been a bit of defensiveness in the replies here; let's get past
>> that & take Christoph's list of failures and just get them taken care of.
>>
>> I'll try to go through the failures and either pick up existing patches,
>> or get new ones written, and get a new series on the list to get this all
>> cleaned up.
> 
> It also would be use if everyone could resend patches more than say 2
> weeks old that haven't moved forward or outright rejected.
> 

That's probably a better plan than having me confuse things by cobbling
together a new series from multiple authors.  So for now I'll retract
my offer.  ;)  But let's get stuff reposted as needed and get it done.

-Eric

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>