Re: [head tinderbox] failure on arm/arm

Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 9 November 2012 14:37, Chuck Burns <break19_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Adrian. diskspace and cpu cycles are things I can spare, drop me a line
> > outside of the ML and we can discuss particulars. "It's just a personal
> > box.. on a residential internet service, I have an amd64 box with 600G free
> > on my pool.. 8G ram.. and I have a smaller i386 box... 100G or so free, 512M
> > ram..  just drop me a line..
>
> Hi,
>
> Those I do have - I have access to all of the ref* boxes in the
> cluster. I'm just typically hacking on this stuff on the train or at a
> cafe, and I don't have a workflow setup for pushing out potential
> diffs to build machines that have all the grunt/disk space for each
> little change that I do.

Wait wait wait. It makes me wonder if you get the patch tested well
on the train or at a cafe before being committed.

> I'm sorry about breaking things from time to time, but besides a small
> handful of "what was I thinking?!" things, the build breaks are just
> that - build breaks. They're easily fixed.

I do not care how things are easily fixed. Remember, when Sam Leffler
was the maintainer of ath and CAMBRIA board (it's an embedded device, right?),
he had never broke the build.

> Adrian

BR,
Doug.