Re: libglade build failure at 2004-12-03 17:24:21.337

[Andy Balaam <andybalaam artificialworlds net>]

Luis Villa wrote:

> On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 09:25:44 +0000, Andy Balaam > >Alternately it has
> been suggested that I keep the previous successful
>  
>
> > > build around, and if a build fails for whatever reason, just copy the
> > > old tree in for that build cycle. I want to keep the last successful
> > > build around for other reasons, so I'll probably just look into that.
> > >      
> > Good idea, so long as it doesn't get out of hand.  An ancient version
> > hanging around could really screw things up in other modules.
> >    
> It can't be worse than the module not building at all, which is the
> only case I'd copy it in, I think.
>  
I guess so, but it makes me uneasy (maybe because it might spread false 
errors everywhere else).

> > Do we need some way of saying "I've terriorised!" any given error.  E.g.
> > should we reply to gnome-build-status saying where we reported a bug or
> > which list we informed of the error, to prevent repetition of this kind
> > of stuff?  Of is the number of lists pretty finite, so this sohuld be
> > discoverable?
> >    
> I'd suggest cc'ing this list, so that everyone is aware not just that
> the complaint has happened, but of the nature of the response. Seem
> reasonable to everyone?
>  
Yes to me, and also reply with a quick note if you made a bug.

Andy