A new FTBFS every day

[Robert Ancell]

This is the important point: if we put this into CI it wont just be your
time spent - it will be everyone else having to change their branches to
satisfy a GCC we're not requiring.

--Robert


On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Daniel van Vugt <
daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com> wrote:

> Put it this way: I will waste more time waiting for builds on my saucy
> machines, than I spend fixing the raring build failures (so I can build on
> my faster raring machine).
>
> And the fixes so far have been trivial. When they're not, I will
> reconsider where my effort goes.
>
>
>
> On 26/06/13 12:22, Robert Ancell wrote:
>
>> I do disagree that increased automation is better. In this case our
>> target platform is GCC 4.8 and slowing down to fix bugs in GCC 4.7 isn't
>> a worthwhile use of time. I appreciate there might be cases where these
>> are genuine bugs that 4.8 is not detecting, but that seems more of a
>> problem in GCC than our code. Also, it seems highly likely for us to use
>> a GCC 4.8 feature given we are already using modern C++ features.
>>
>> --Robert
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Daniel van Vugt
>> <daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com <mailto:daniel.van.vugt@**canonical.com<daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>
>> >>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     I doubt people would object to increased automation, unless we start
>>     needing language features missing in gcc-4.7.
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 26/06/13 10:49, Thomi Richards wrote:
>>
>>         Hi Daniel,
>>
>>
>>         On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Daniel van Vugt
>>         <daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt@**canonical.com<daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>
>> >
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at __cano**nical.com <http://canonical.com>
>>
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt@**canonical.com<daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>
>> >>>
>>
>>         wrote:
>>
>>
>>              Can we add raring CI support back in so these build
>>         problems get
>>              caught in time?
>>
>>
>>         I believe that's a question for me, and the answer is "yes, we
>> can".
>>         Unless there are any objections, I'll add raring as a CI platform
>>         tomorrow (thereby giving the list 12 hours to object).
>>
>>
>>         Cheers,
>>
>>
>>         --
>>         Thomi Richards
>>         thomi.richards at canonical.com
>>         <mailto:thomi.richards@**canonical.com<thomi.richards at canonical.com>
>> >
>>         <mailto:thomi.richards at __canon**ical.com <http://canonical.com>
>>
>>         <mailto:thomi.richards@**canonical.com<thomi.richards at canonical.com>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>     --
>>     Mir-devel mailing list
>>     Mir-devel at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Mir-devel at lists.**ubuntu.com<Mir-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>
>> >
>>
>>     Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>     https://lists.ubuntu.com/__**mailman/listinfo/mir-devel<https://lists.ubuntu.com/__mailman/listinfo/mir-devel>
>>     <https://lists.ubuntu.com/**mailman/listinfo/mir-devel<https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/mir-devel/attachments/20130626/1b79d37e/attachment.html>