From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 27 23:22:58 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 AAD9D1065671; Tue, 27 May 2008 23:22:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) Received: from smtpoutm.mac.com (smtpoutm.mac.com [17.148.16.75]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F098FC0C; Tue, 27 May 2008 23:22:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) Received: from asmtp012-bge351000 (asmtp012-bge351000 [10.150.69.75]) by smtpoutm.mac.com (Xserve/smtpout012/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id m4RNMwY0019372; Tue, 27 May 2008 16:22:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Received: from macbook-pro.jnpr.net (natint3.juniper.net [66.129.224.36]) by asmtp012.mac.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-6.03 (built Mar 14 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0K1J001EHVM8WW20@asmtp012.mac.com>; Tue, 27 May 2008 16:22:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: From: Marcel Moolenaar To: Peter Wemm In-reply-to: Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 16:22:55 -0700 References: <20080525221112.GH5179@what-creek.com> <21823.1211785618@critter.freebsd.dk> <20080527110625.GA97301@zim.MIT.EDU> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Poul-Henning Kamp , John Birrell , Robert Watson , John Birrell 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 23:22:58 -0000 On May 27, 2008, at 3:35 PM, Peter Wemm wrote: > 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. These are bad ideas, because people *WILL* do the absolute minimum and as such will end up breaking non-tier1 platforms even more often than they do already. People need to remember that maintainers of non-tier1 platforms spend most of their time fixing problems that can easily be dealt with by the 300+ developers not worrying about non-tier1 (as it hardly ever requires in-depth knowledge of the platform). For the non-tier1 maintainers this is a *BIG* waste of their time... FYI, -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com