qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RFC PATCH] travis.yml: Drop the default softmmu builds


From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] travis.yml: Drop the default softmmu builds
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:12:51 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0

On 05/09/2020 14.15, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 05/08/2020 20.54, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> The total runtime of all Travis jobs is very long and we are testing
>> all softmmu targets in the gitlab-CI already - so we can speed up the
>> Travis testing a little bit by not testing the softmmu targets here
>> anymore.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  Well, ok, we do not test all the softmmu targets on gitlab-CI with
>>  that same ancient version of Ubuntu ... but do we still care about
>>  testing all softmmut targets on Ubuntu Xenial at all? ... at least
>>  according to our support policy, we do not care about Xenial anymore.
>>
>>  .travis.yml | 14 --------------
>>  1 file changed, 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/.travis.yml b/.travis.yml
>> index 6695c0620f..18290bc51d 100644
>> --- a/.travis.yml
>> +++ b/.travis.yml
>> @@ -123,20 +123,6 @@ jobs:
>>          - CONFIG="--disable-system --static"
>>          - CACHE_NAME="${TRAVIS_BRANCH}-linux-gcc-default"
>>  
>> -
>> -    # we split the system builds as it takes a while to build them all
>> -    - name: "GCC (main-softmmu)"
>> -      env:
>> -        - CONFIG="--disable-user --target-list=${MAIN_SOFTMMU_TARGETS}"
>> -        - CACHE_NAME="${TRAVIS_BRANCH}-linux-gcc-default"
>> -
>> -
>> -    - name: "GCC (other-softmmu)"
>> -      env:
>> -       - CONFIG="--disable-user 
>> --target-list-exclude=${MAIN_SOFTMMU_TARGETS}"
>> -        - CACHE_NAME="${TRAVIS_BRANCH}-linux-gcc-default"
>> -
>> -
>>      # Just build tools and run minimal unit and softfloat checks
>>      - name: "GCC check-softfloat (user)"
>>        env:
>>
> 
> Ping?

Ping^2 ... Alex, Philippe, any opinions on this patch?

 Thomas




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]