Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 19:59:55 +0000 From: John Birrell <jb@what-creek.com> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, John Birrell <jb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src Makefile Message-ID: <20080525195955.GB5179@what-creek.com> In-Reply-To: <20080525180014.S63463@fledge.watson.org> References: <200805250248.m4P2mv8U026913@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080525180014.S63463@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 06:03:22PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > Is there something in your recent work that prevents sun4v from compiling > and hence justifies disabling it entirely, and hence guaranteeing it won't > compile in the future because it falls off the "make it compile" radar? If > so, then a policy decision to drop sun4v support may be called for -- but > this is something to discuss with the people who added support for the > architecture, the release engineering team, etc, and not to make > unilaterally. When I added sun4v to universe back in 2006, I had hopes that it would live up to it's early promise. Adding it back then was premature. I guess you could say I made a unilateral decision back then. :-D The last time I checked, the sun4v port wouldn't even boot on my T2000, so I have to ask if there is anyone who even knows that. Or cares. Just keeping the code compiling is not good enough. It has to actually work. I haven't removed any support for building sun4v. I just think that the few people who do build universe shouldn't have to wait for a dead port to build. -- John Birrell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080525195955.GB5179>