Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2018 21:18:13 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 230355] [exp-run] Against projects/clang700-import branch Message-ID: <bug-230355-7788-sNFQqaqTwa@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-230355-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-230355-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D230355 --- Comment #26 from Jan Beich <jbeich@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Mark Linimon from comment #25) > Surely we can't be considering this. LLD hasn't been extensively tested in the wild (before FreeBSD). Newer may = need less LLD_UNSAFE. Explicitly rejecting -z <unknown> is better than silently accepting it to prevent runtime bugs. > On the last headamd64PR230355-default run, neither gnome, kde, > samba, openoffice, nor qemu built. IMVHO that constitutes a > "don't-ship". Users don't usually install from /release_<n> but /quarterly. The latter is= a moving target. By the time 12.0-RELEASE more ports can be fixed. How many ports builds shouldn't be very important from base system POV. The primary concern is catching toolchain bugs (e.g., bug 230622 or bug 230412)= , so consumers (not just ports) don't have to invent gross workarounds. Obviousl= y, too few ports building would prevent enough exposure. However, if you need a stable compiler stick to a specific devel/llvm* on all FreeBSD versions. Why FreeBSD release engineering is still driven by ports/ freezes, something wh= ich was abolished years ago? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-230355-7788-sNFQqaqTwa>