* Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> [081210 12:29]:
>> No, the standard way to deal with such issues is to set up two buildfarm
>> members. This would be a 100% waste of cycles for gcc-based members
>> anyway, since gcc generates the same code with or without -g. However,
>> for compilers where it makes a difference, it might well be worth having
>> an additional member to test the optimized build.
> I think current infrastructures is not good for it. For example I would
> like to compile postgres on one machine with three different compiler and
> in 32 or 64 mode. Should I have 6 animals? I think better idea is to have
> one animal and several test sets. Animals defines HW+OS version and test
> set specify PG version, configure switches, compiler and so on.
Sure and in my neck of the woods, and there are cows, calfs, heiffers,
bulls, steers, but they are all cattle... And when talking about cows,
Jerseys and Guernsey's have high MF, lower production, Ayrshire have
high production, lower MF, and Holstiens inbetween.
Should I call them "cow with high MF" and "cow with high production", or
just say Jersey or Ayrshire?
Where ever you (the generic you, not specific you) draw the line, what
you call it is still arbitrary... But where that line is drawn
currently defined in the buildfarm code...
Not that it can't be changed, but I thin there's much better things to
worry about ;-)
a.
--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
