From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 27 22:35:11 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A7F71065675 for ; Tue, 27 May 2008 22:35:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.251]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4402A8FC19 for ; Tue, 27 May 2008 22:35:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b33so642795ana.13 for ; Tue, 27 May 2008 15:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.215.14 with SMTP id n14mr2241382ang.69.1211927709967; Tue, 27 May 2008 15:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.8.6 with HTTP; Tue, 27 May 2008 15:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 15:35:09 -0700 From: "Peter Wemm" To: "Peter Wemm" , "Poul-Henning Kamp" , "John Birrell" , "Robert Watson" , "John Birrell" , src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20080527110625.GA97301@zim.MIT.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080525221112.GH5179@what-creek.com> <21823.1211785618@critter.freebsd.dk> <20080527110625.GA97301@zim.MIT.EDU> Cc: Subject: Re: cvs commit: src Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 22:35:11 -0000 On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 4:06 AM, David Schultz wrote: > On Mon, May 26, 2008, Peter Wemm wrote: >> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> > In message <20080525221112.GH5179@what-creek.com>, John Birrell writes: >> > >> >>I will back out the change, but I think you are making the 'universe' target >> >>out to be more than was intended. We used to talk about tiers. We seem to have >> >>lost sight of that. >> > >> > No, architecture tiers is about code how well the code runs, make >> > universe is simply a way to keep it compiling. >> >> sparc64 and sun4v share userland. The sparc64 in universe overs 99% >> of the compile test for sun4v already. >> >> It seems a shame to compile sparc64 userland twice for universe. And >> on that note, do we compile i386 twice for i386 and pc98? >> >> I might find myself more inclined to use 'universe' if it had less >> duplicated work. > > I've always thought it would be nice to have a stripped-down > version of make universe (make galaxy?) that compiled for a > representative sample of platforms, and with only one or two > kernels per platform instead of 3 or 4 or 5. For small changes, > this represents a better tradeoff in time spent compiling vs. the > cost of things breaking occasionally. For actively developed > platforms, breaking the build wastes lots of people's time; for > everything else, there's tinderbox. "make tier1" ? (Stuff which must not be broken) "make tier2" etc. FWIW, I really don't think it is worth burning an entire 99.9999% duplicate build cycle just to test a #ifdef SUN4V in one file in libc. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 "If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete themselves upon execution." -- Robert Sewell