Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 09:45:57 -0400 From: Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r234504 - in head/sys: amd64/conf i386/conf Message-ID: <CAFMmRNy6Ew_A1%2BCAq5Off%2BNxYxEMBHs8ZgfyG7pvVbbR9sCk7Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201204202137.q3KLbhNj056524@svn.freebsd.org> References: <201204202137.q3KLbhNj056524@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> wrote: > Author: brooks > Date: Fri Apr 20 21:37:42 2012 > New Revision: 234504 > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/234504 > > Log: > =A0Enable DTrace hooks in GENERIC. > > =A0Reviewed by: =A0gnn > =A0Approved by: =A0core (jhb, imp) > =A0Requested by: a cast of thousands > =A0MFC after: =A0 =A03 days Excellent! Thanks to everybody who helped make this happen, starting with the participants at dtrace.conf who gave us the requisite whacks with the clue-by-four. However, what is our policy for enabling features in -STABLE that are known to be unstable? If we MFC this I don't have the slightest worry that somebody might see instability in their system just because the hooks are all of a sudden there, but I would worry that somebody make take DTrace hooks being enabled in GENERIC on -STABLE to imply that DTrace is stable, start using it and being upset when they trip over a DTrace bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFMmRNy6Ew_A1%2BCAq5Off%2BNxYxEMBHs8ZgfyG7pvVbbR9sCk7Q>