Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 16:27:36 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>, Alexander Kabaev <ak03@gte.com>, <current@FreeBSD.ORG>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: i386 tinderbox failure Message-ID: <20021009162539.B4060-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20021008231042.247562A88D@canning.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: > "David O'Brien" wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 03:55:36PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > > Could you please just commit this on the vendor branch if it is the > > > ... > > Doing this screws up diffs to vendor source as there won't be a tag that > > corisponds with this across all files. For small contribed things that > > is OK. But when doing large ones it the following import+merge becomes > > harder. > > While that is true, it usually isn't all that big a deal if you are careful > and keep track of what you've done. It is certainly better than causing > the file to leave the vendor branch for something you *know* is now in the > vendor tree. And I think its better than leaving a known 'compiler crash' > case there to bite developers. It doesn't bite me. What am I doing wrong? :-) I just turned of the -mcpu=pentiumpro pessimization before it affected anything. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021009162539.B4060-100000>