From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14817 invoked by alias); 29 May 2007 17:24:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 14809 invoked by uid 22791); 29 May 2007 17:24:13 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 May 2007 17:24:11 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4THO3ov031316; Tue, 29 May 2007 13:24:03 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4THNCeF013323; Tue, 29 May 2007 13:23:12 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4THNBk9027074; Tue, 29 May 2007 13:23:12 -0400 Message-ID: <465C6197.6030405@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 18:50:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070301) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Van Hees CC: frysk Subject: Re: Automated build-and-test summary report (2007/05/23) References: <20070523141034.GA16276@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <46545CB3.6000509@redhat.com> <20070523214658.GB16276@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <4655CCF6.8080607@redhat.com> <20070524192441.GC16276@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <465B262C.5090104@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <465B262C.5090104@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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-q2/txt/msg00215.txt.bz2 Kris, ping. Andrew Cagney wrote: > Kris, > > Again, I would really appreciate it if we didn't fill the list with > your test-results. If the system must always post out its results > then it unfortunatly sounds like the best solution is to limit them to > once a week. Sigh. > > Andrew >