Re: Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version

[Jesper Krogh]

I gmane.linux.kernel, skrev Blaisorblade:
>  Forgot drivers testing? That is where most of the bugs are hidden, and where 
>  wide user testing is definitely needed because of the various hardware bugs 
>  and different configurations existing in real world.

A way that could raise the testing upon a particular kernel, would be to
provide; (debian example follows):
... example .. 
An apt-repository with the newest tagged kernel build modular for the
architecture. 

Just drop all tagged kernels in a common repository that the users can
follow, then I'd be happy to test a new kernel on every reboot on my
system. I'd probably still would respond if anything was broken in the
new kernel.. 

Then it wouldn't be: "try this patch and see if that solves anything"
but do:

apt-get install kernel-image-386-torvalds-linux-2.6-v2.6.13-rc3

(automatically build from the "torvalds/linux-2.6"-branch with tag
"v2.6.13-rc3" using a modular kernel-configuration similar to the one
used in the stock debian kernels.  

Then I find and report something and "Pavel Machek" releases a "try-fix", by
tagging a branch ind a tree and tells me to try
kernel-image-386-pavel-good-2.6-v2.6.13-rc3 
instead. 

(and variations.. acip/no-acip smp, etc. etc. )

... example end .. 


It would be quite a lot central kernel-building, but as far as I can
see, it can be fully automated. 

It would defininately lower the barrier for being able to paticipate in
testing, but I am not the one to decide if that would be a desirable
goal?  Or for that matter, worth the work. 

Jesper
-- 
./Jesper Krogh, jesper@xxxxxxxx, Jabber ID: jesper@xxxxxxxxxxxx


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/