From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jan 17 20:01:08 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7256106566B;
	Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:01:08 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from uqs@spoerlein.net)
Received: from acme.spoerlein.net (acme.spoerlein.net
	[IPv6:2a01:4f8:131:23c2::1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B22F8FC15;
	Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:01:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (acme.spoerlein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:131:23c2::1])
	by acme.spoerlein.net (8.14.5/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0HK17Se098679
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
	Tue, 17 Jan 2012 21:01:07 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from uqs@spoerlein.net)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=spoerlein.net;
	s=dkim200908; t=1326830467;
	bh=ZYAVZlL96LegRLAyfNARg2IBNKsEhL/sSjOrYnBboNY=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:
	Content-Type:In-Reply-To;
	b=dWsQDTqEqrXJoXjdA5WjNoGsQZtW1K1MRJOahAt22qadrCxHrAxZN80r6B1uV0tOA
	53XjSqX8XhbFgYyLZ9PN2+EH/nZnpBFBOCswIvgWJDSelNF4R3YYVDLYoiAZucOrdv
	21aQ1jEFDK3zuyEdefprXHEzbWCU0Fcmj3jpYOR8=
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 21:01:07 +0100
From: Ulrich =?utf-8?B?U3DDtnJsZWlu?= <uqs@spoerlein.net>
To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20120117200106.GB3489@acme.spoerlein.net>
Mail-Followup-To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org>,
	FreeBSD current mailing list <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>,
	freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
References: <511C0E5F-DBA1-4E41-B8CF-6DEEE35E14D6@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <511C0E5F-DBA1-4E41-B8CF-6DEEE35E14D6@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org,
	FreeBSD current mailing list <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Build Option Survey results
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:01:08 -0000

On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 07:45:34 +0000, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> after two years I had the opportunity to run the build option survey,
> initially done by phk, again.  The number of options seems to have grown
> quite a bit it felt.  I have not even looked at the results yet but here
> they are fresh off the machine:
> 
>    http://people.freebsd.org/~bz/build_option_survey_20120106/
> 
> Special thanks go to np, sbruno and bhaga for bringing worm back to life.

Cool. Is the idea to kill options that have zero effect on anything?
What about options that are broken? Is it worth carrying around tons of
conditionals if they don't even work?

Aren't we supposed to have an army of embedded people that use all of
that stuff? Or is nanobsd circumventing the WITHOUT_FOO logic?

Cheers,
Uli