[Xorg] new comitter

[Eric Anholt]

On Sun, 2004-07-25 at 17:30, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jul 2004, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > On Sun, 2004-07-25 at 16:33, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> > > On Sun, 25 Jul 2004, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > > > Mostly we're missing build machines.
> > >
> > > Do the scripts generate output that we could provide for inclusion in
> > > this tinderbox?  If so, we have some systems at OSDL that we could
> > > probably run them on.  If you can point me at the scripts, I'll look
> > > into it.
> >
> > There are instructions at:
> > http://www.freedesktop.org/Software/TinderboxWiki
> >
> > Thanks!  Feedback is very welcome, too.
> 
> Ahh, interesting, yes this looks doable.  What we have is an automated
> system that manages a bunch of client machines, compiling/installing
> stuff on them and running tests, wiping and re-installing between runs.
> It sounds like doing a tinderbox run would be directly analogous to what
> we're already doing.
> 
> However, is our environment "interesting" enough to be worth setting up
> in this way?  Basically, we've got ia32 systems with 1, 2, 4, and 8 cpu,
> can install redhat 7.1 or 9.0 or suse 9.0, and pretty much any version
> of the linux kernel (including all the major branches).  Does this
> environment sound like it would provide sufficient additional coverage?
> Are there easy ways we could tweak it to provide more coverage (like
> installing alternatives of particular libs/tools or other distros).

We have no Linux tinderboxes running, so any Linux tinderbox would be
great.  I would go with a recent redhat or suse.  I'm thinking at this
point that I need to make some more tb server-controllable knobs in the
scripts.  Adding a no-DRI control would be easy (I have it in the
scripts and I hand-edit the switch to "on" on the machine I do it on). 
Checking different GCC versions might be useful, and adding a control
for that wouldn't be hard I don't think.  If we get too many variables,
though, we'll have to figure out a better way of formatting the output.

> > > > The tinderbox3 system has a lot of rough edges in terms
> > > > of general interface and configuration that could use polishing, too.
> > >
> > > For the kernel tinderbox (http://tinderbox.osdl.org/) we added a
> > > legend.
> >
> > That legend does look much nicer than our interface.  I was speaking
> > more to the administrator's interface, though, which I've been confused
> > by several times (sherriff/edit differentiation, broken logins,
> > mozilla-related defaults, I can't remember what else).
> 
> I spoke with Cliff; looks like he's going to be gone for a good while
> (caring for family).  If there are urgent issues with Tinderbox to get
> it ready for use in doing the August release, I can be available to
> help.  Otherwise I'll focus on seeing if we can scare up some more build
> client resources.

I think build client resources are the biggest thing we need.  Thanks!

-- 
Eric Anholt                                eta at lclark.edu          
http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/         anholt at FreeBSD.org