From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 20 22:46:43 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C970F16A4B3; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:46:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-64-169-107-253.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [64.169.107.253]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EB8543FE5; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:46:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from rot13.obsecurity.org (rot13.obsecurity.org [10.0.0.5]) by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E2D66D6A; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:46:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rot13.obsecurity.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 56D287CA; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:46:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:46:37 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: John Birrell Message-ID: <20030921054637.GB40864@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <20030920.204425.25098720.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030921051525.GA31537@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030921051525.GA31537@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: deischen@freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org cc: "M. Warner Losh" cc: h@schmalzbauer.de Subject: Re: ports and -current X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 05:46:44 -0000 --v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 03:15:25PM +1000, John Birrell wrote: > On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 01:07:15AM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > But you seem to thing -pthread =3D=3D NOOP unbreaks ports ;-) >=20 > Warner might, but Kris doesn't. Kris is asking for the -pthread option > to be restored to let -current users breath easy while the task of updati= ng > the ports goes on. Then he's happy for it to become a noop. >=20 > I susect theat this puts much of the work on a few people rather than man= y. > I hope it doesn't require a volley of emails to each port maintainer to > resolve each one. People have jumped off buildings for less than that! I expect it's about a dozen man-hours of work, or so, if there's a group of people working on the problem. If left to the individual maintainers to solve, it will take a lot longer in wall clock time, and we'll probably end up with a bunch of incorrect fixes. It should be no trouble at all to find volunteer port committers to help with the task. Kris --v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/bTs8Wry0BWjoQKURAoNhAKCYt6ZyTChh0r5cYKIgpLyYFxsypACeL2h9 ZlyqzgiYd+Lsv5YHx7lfT4s= =cBqY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6--