"Hosts" within tinderbox?
ade at FreeBSD.org
Sun Oct 7 04:12:41 EDT 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Oct 07, 2007, at 01:05 , Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> That said, do as you like, but in the end, it would be nice to have at
> least the current feature set of `tinderd' back.
tinderd is alive and well in HEAD, I put that code back some time ago.
My question here is one of whether anyone actually uses, in the
limited sense provided, the per-host configuration provided by the
Hosts table (and code thereof).
What I'm trying to do here is to get a decent feature-complete set
codebase for tinderbox (as it currently stands) based on HEAD, which
eventually becomes 3.0, Depleted Uranium, or whatever, with all of
the constraints that it is currently under.
Once we have *that*, then we can sit down and whiteboard what we want
to achieve with tinderboxes in general (and I'd personally like to
see singleton tinderboxes running roughly the same code as the
package building cluster, so a combination of the two systems), and
go for tinderbox:NG.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the tinderbox-list