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> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, FreeBSD current mailing list <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Build Option Survey results Message-ID: <20120117200106.GB3489@acme.spoerlein.net> In-Reply-To: <511C0E5F-DBA1-4E41-B8CF-6DEEE35E14D6@FreeBSD.org> References: <511C0E5F-DBA1-4E41-B8CF-6DEEE35E14D6@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120117200106.GB3489>