On 12/17/2015 02:26 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> On Mon, 2015-12-14 at 11:15 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 02:19:35PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 15:15 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
>>>
There are several places
Hi Brian,
On Mon, 2015-12-14 at 11:15 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 02:19:35PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 15:15 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> >
> > > There are several places where we don't report proper exit statuses, and
> > >
Hi Michael,
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 02:19:35PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 15:15 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
>
> > There are several places where we don't report proper exit statuses, and
> > this can have consequences -- for instance, the gen_kselftest_tar.sh
> > script
Hi Brian,
On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 15:15 -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> There are several places where we don't report proper exit statuses, and
> this can have consequences -- for instance, the gen_kselftest_tar.sh
> script might try to produce a tarball for you, even if the 'make' or
> 'make install
There are several places where we don't report proper exit statuses, and
this can have consequences -- for instance, the gen_kselftest_tar.sh
script might try to produce a tarball for you, even if the 'make' or
'make install' steps didn't complete properly.
This is only an RFC (and really, it's mo
5 matches
Mail list logo