From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13692 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2007 15:03:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 13683 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Nov 2007 15:03:49 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from wildebeest.demon.nl (HELO gnu.wildebeest.org) (83.160.170.119) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:03:44 +0000 Received: from dijkstra.wildebeest.org ([192.168.1.29]) by gnu.wildebeest.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IpPxt-0004jb-Gn; Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:03:42 +0100 Subject: Re: Automated build-and-test summary report (2007/11/05) From: Mark Wielaard To: Kris Van Hees Cc: frysk@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20071106134446.GE10486@oracle.com> References: <20071105140036.GA2015@oracle.com> <1194344729.3855.1.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org> <20071106114115.GD10486@oracle.com> <1194351776.3855.31.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org> <20071106134446.GE10486@oracle.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-EIqqzfJ+dfLE90JdmHtd" Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 15:03:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1194361421.3855.62.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.3 (2.8.3-2.fc6) X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on sourceware.org X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q4/txt/msg00107.txt.bz2 --=-EIqqzfJ+dfLE90JdmHtd Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-length: 833 Hi Kris, Thanks for that explanation. Much clearer now! On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 08:44 -0500, Kris Van Hees wrote: > Would it be more clear if I changed that to be: >=20 > First failure: test (previously: no changes - not built) Yes, adding previously is much better. But maybe just put it on its own line? First failure this run : test First failure previous run : no changes - not built (It would be nice to have an entry also for the last time built and where it failed that time.) I think the real confusion comes from the "-". Why not replace it with "so" (no changes so not built). Or just spell it out completely "not built because no sources changed" to be completely clear. All the above is clearly nitpicking though. Now that I have read your explanation I can easily parse any of the outputs. Cheers, Mark --=-EIqqzfJ+dfLE90JdmHtd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-length: 189 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBHMIJJxVhZCJWr9QwRAtA2AJ4/Lbx1ODVOTnHyTP4pYfwZhVnRYQCfZ8j+ cgd6VgN9Mxi0MIG1o2udb0E= =OEr5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-EIqqzfJ+dfLE90JdmHtd--