Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 01:23:44 +0000 From: Steven Hartland <steven@multiplay.co.uk> To: Allan Jude <allanjude@freebsd.org>, NGie Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com>, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> Cc: "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r293724 - in head/sys/boot: arm64/libarm64 common efi/boot1 efi/fdt efi/include efi/include/arm64 efi/libefi efi/loader efi/loader/arch/amd64 efi/loader/arch/arm efi/loader/arch/arm64 i... Message-ID: <5695A720.3000302@multiplay.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <5695A40C.6050306@freebsd.org> References: <201601120217.u0C2HdBC089684@repo.freebsd.org> <1452645668.46848.34.camel@freebsd.org> <56959DA7.9050206@freebsd.org> <1452646442.46848.37.camel@freebsd.org> <CAGHfRMB9b5FCDmYZFJv8W7ChZmvNddYCKYjiObUk3P4JHr6GAw@mail.gmail.com> <5695A40C.6050306@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 13/01/2016 01:10, Allan Jude wrote:
> On 2016-01-12 20:05, NGie Cooper wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> ...
>>> For several reasons. The fact that gcc isn't the default compiler
>>> doesn't mean that it's okay for code to not compile with gcc; it's
>>> still a supported compiler for arm.
>>
>> Agreed. It also makes things messier when MFCing changes if it doesn't
>> work with gcc.
>> Thanks,
>> -NGie
>>
>
> If it is a supported compiler, maybe we need a tinderbox option that
> compiles ARM with gcc, to catch cases like this.
>
Yer we really should.
I explicitly ran tinderbox on these changes in order to ensure all the
bases where covered, if there are additional options not run by
tinderbox but are supported then we really need add them otherwise we're
just assuming everyone knows to manually test additional configurations
which is never going to work.
Regards
Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5695A720.3000302>