These are smoketest results. How about n.p.m.builds and n.p.m.embedding?
I agree these daily posts are not relevant to jockeying of pork.
chris
Adam Lock wrote:
> If not in porkjockeys then where? I believe that it should be posted
> somewhere prominent because the smoketest often lists bugs caused by
> changes made outside of embedding. Embedding is particularly susceptible
> to changes in the chrome, psm and componentization (manifests etc.).
>
> In addition to this, people should be building and testing changes
> against the embedding clients whether they're interested in them or not.
> Embedding bugs often take hours to debug and keep the tree closed (for
> blockers) when a few moments testing by the change author with mfcEmbed
> or TestGtkEmbed may have avoided the problem altogther.
>
> Adam
>
> Alec Flett wrote:
>
>> What are the chances that we could stop publishing this report to the
>> porkjockeys newsgroup? it's almost the same every day, and if people
>> are worried about embedding-specific issues, they should be reading
>> n.p.m.embedding anyway...those of us reading n.p.m.embedding have see
>> this report twice every morning.
>>
>> Alec
>>
>>
>> Tracy Walker wrote:
>>
>>> * Windows 2001-09-04-05-trunk
>>> <ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/2001-09-04-05-trunk/embed-win32.zip>
>>> mfcembed smoketest results*
>>>
>>> *- Embedding: PASS*:
>>>
>>> - Bug # 70714
>>> <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70714> : Visited link
>>> doesn't change color
>>>
>>> - Bug # 97778
>>> <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97778> : http auth
>>> dialogue keeps popping up
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *-Tracy*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
