Re: [head tinderbox] failure on arm/arm

On Friday, November 09, 2012 05:47:43 PM 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.
> 
> 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.

This is why I use p4 branches.  I hack on my laptop and then commit it
to p4 and use 'p4 sync' as a glorified rsync on development hosts.  I can
then do a full 'make tinderbox' before committing to HEAD after extracting
the patches from p4 and applying them to an SVN checkout.  SVN branches
should let you do something similar as well (or just about any soure code
control system you choose to use).

-- 
John Baldwin