From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 4 09:22:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2560216A422; Sat, 4 Feb 2006 09:22:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from wb@freebie.xs4all.nl) Received: from smtp-vbr1.xs4all.nl (smtp-vbr1.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5108843D45; Sat, 4 Feb 2006 09:22:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from wb@freebie.xs4all.nl) Received: from freebie.xs4all.nl (freebie.xs4all.nl [213.84.32.253]) by smtp-vbr1.xs4all.nl (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k149MSLj069104; Sat, 4 Feb 2006 10:22:29 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wb@freebie.xs4all.nl) Received: from freebie.xs4all.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freebie.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k149MSkF046360; Sat, 4 Feb 2006 10:22:28 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wb@freebie.xs4all.nl) Received: (from wb@localhost) by freebie.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id k149MPA3046359; Sat, 4 Feb 2006 10:22:25 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wb) Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 10:22:25 +0100 From: Wilko Bulte To: Warner Losh Message-ID: <20060204092225.GB46310@freebie.xs4all.nl> References: <861wykr9vx.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060203.105305.71186162.imp@bsdimp.com> <43E4142A.4@samsco.org> <20060203.215549.74746986.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20060203.215549.74746986.imp@bsdimp.com> X-OS: FreeBSD 6.0-STABLE User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, harti@FreeBSD.ORG, sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG, stable@FreeBSD.ORG, kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 09:22:41 -0000 On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 09:55:49PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote.. > From: Scott Long > Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 > Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 19:40:42 -0700 > > > Warner Losh wrote: > > > From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) > > > Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 > > > Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:53:38 +0100 > > > > > > > > >>Kris Kennaway writes: > > >> > > >>>COPTFLAGS=-O -pipe according to the tinderbox logs. > > >> > > >>Hmm, yes, apparently it only uses -O2 on HEAD. > > > > > > > > > Can we not have special flags for tinderbox builds? It make > > > pre-commit testing a big pita. How about just -O on both head and in > > > RELENG_6? The kernel make files have special magic to disable the > > > parts of -O2 that are known to be bad because tinderbox uses -O2, > > > despite efforts in the past to stop the practice. > > > > > > Warner > > > > > > > > > > There is value in testing -O2, since enabling that is a good long-term > > goal. What might be nice is to run tinderboxes with all default > > compiler settings, and then once or twice a week to a special run that > > has the more experimental flags. > > My point is that it is unreasonable to get bitched at for tinerbox > breakages that don't show up when building lint because the tinderbox > person is too stubborn to not use non-standard flags. I would think that the tinderboxes should run 100% the same flags as what normal release builds use. Nothing more, nothing less. -- Wilko Bulte wilko@FreeBSD.org