Re: current RE24 experience

[Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com>]

Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Monday, May 11, 2009 9:06 AM -0400 Aaron Richton
> <richton@nbcs.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> 
>> I've had a spurt of bad luck with 2.4.16 (it appears Quanah and a few
>> others may share that opinion). The seg faults inspired me to run under
>> libumem, which has some interesting features that give you "moderate"
>> debug ability in exchange for moderate performance hit -- small enough
>> that I can run it hot safely, unlike full-featured memory debuggers.
>>
>> At this point a RE24 checkout from late Saturday has been good for me in
>> production, with some moderate libumem checks enabled. Is everybody else
>> starting to see RE24 shape up? Bottom line...I think I'm now +1 for
>> encouraging a 2.4.17 train, for what it's worth...
> 
> Overall, RE24 looks a lot better than 2.4.16, yes.

I'm still experiencing make test to fail occassionally in various tests
(e.g. see ITS#6126).

Ciao, Michael.