From owner-freebsd-current Thu Feb 23 09:17:39 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id JAA07236 for current-outgoing; Thu, 23 Feb 1995 09:17:39 -0800 Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id JAA07230 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 1995 09:17:38 -0800 Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA03169; Thu, 23 Feb 95 10:10:58 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Message-Id: <9502231710.AA03169@cs.weber.edu> Subject: Re: TRUE and FALSE -> is this true? To: nate@trout.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 95 10:10:57 MST Cc: rcarter@geli.com, current@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <199502230324.UAA17345@trout.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Feb 22, 95 08:24:55 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52] Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > |Starting from a running system, you are guaranteed to get everything > > |working with 2 make worlds, and a 3rd certainly shouldn't hurt. > > > > For those of us suping current regularly, and having the make world > > occasionally fail, does this imply that it might work to try make world > > twice? (Or three times?) > > No, it implies that if a release is to be done, then make world should > work. If make world doesn't work, then the release isn't ready. So, > assuming a make world works, then it should work multiple times. For further rationale, look at the gcc documentation about compiler "stages". Basically it boils down to compiling the compiler with the compiler so that it doesn't have the bugs that it has. 8-). God, I love that explanation. So much so that I'm going to smile again. 8-). Too bad I can't take credit for it. 8-(. Ah! I claim paraphrase! "Build the system with the system on the system so that it doesn't have the bugs that it has". 8-). Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.