[Xen-devel] Re: Re: Daily Xen Builds

[Sean Dague <sean@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 04:50:16PM -0000, Ian Pratt wrote:
> > IP> The changes to xm-test you posted on Friday seem to have 
> > broken the 
> > IP> initrd such that the guest can't mount /proc, which seems 
> > to account 
> > IP> for the failures.
> > 
> > Actually, the problem is not from my Friday changes.  I 
> > pulled the initrd's from David's machines.  The machine with 
> > only 8 failures had a correct initrd, while the others had an 
> > older version that was made before the init script was made 
> > to be +x.  Not sure why.  He is going to blow away all of his 
> > existing trees today and see if that fixes the problem.
> > 
> > Having the rcS file not +x meant that /proc wasn't being 
> > mounted, which led to many failures.  We cleared this up 
> > shortly after the import since a lot of file permissions were lost.
> 
> OK, so I believe we're agreed it's "case closed" as regards an actual
> regression.

Sorry for the firedrill, the jump in fails looked really suspicious to me,
and I wanted to make sure folks were payings attention. :)

I think this proves that xm-test could really use a sanity check upfront,
where it ensures certain things look alright before starting the rest of the
tests.

        -Sean

-- 
__________________________________________________________________

Sean Dague                                       Mid-Hudson Valley
sean at dague dot net                            Linux Users Group
http://dague.net                                 http://mhvlug.org

There is no silver bullet.  Plus, werewolves make better neighbors
than zombies, and they tend to keep the vampire population down.
__________________________________________________________________

Attachment: pgp5rFNKChMBe.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel