Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:43:43 +0900 From: "Akinori MUSHA" <knu@iDaemons.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11-toolkits/fox/files patch-ad Message-ID: <86bspe4qhs.wl@archon.local.idaemons.org> In-Reply-To: <20010430023347.A70094@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200104300810.f3U8AGY60114@freefall.freebsd.org> <86elua4wf1.wl@archon.local.idaemons.org> <20010430023347.A70094@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At Mon, 30 Apr 2001 02:33:47 -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > Also, I haven't yet tested if this big monster of a toolkit works with > > optimization flags other than "-O2 -ffast-math -finline-functions > > -fomit-frame-pointer -fexpensive-optimizations". I wish you had > > pointed it to me rather than just committing directly. > > Well, the policy from all quarters of the project is that everything > over -O is dangerous and is known to break. I tested compilation of > all of the patches I've been committing today, but since I've just Please notice that I'm not talking about the principle. Some pieces of software actually do NOT run with -O, but run with -O2. -O is not perfect. In this case, at least -O2 is proven to work already, but -O is not even tested by you or me. (soon I will ;) > been making ports conform to accepted rules I didn't see the need to > send each and every patch through maintainers (that would have at > least doubled the total time it would take me to get through these). > For a couple of the ports I came across functional (non-style) changes > which should be made; those I bounced to the maintainers for approval. Sometimes circumstances override the rules. You cannot conform to the rules when one of the rules breaks a port. Also, the change was not obvious. I am sure I'm one of the most active ports committers, and I think you could just suggest the point and leave the modifications and the due tests to me, although I fully appreciate that you were trying to do the right thing. > Basically I think the approach we should be taking wrt -O2 and so on > is that people should need to justify why their port should default to > add anything of the sort to the user-supplied values. It's (almost) > never a good idea. Why don't you yell so loudly on the ports@ list first? We are no dummies, but all ears. ;) But anyway, you have shown good examples we can follow. Thanks. > I take full responsibility for any errors I caused during this series > of commits. It looks like the /usr/local thing snuck through > unexpectedly in this case; I've already fixed it and will go back and > re-check the others. Well, I'm afraid you would have to... I wish this whole thread will remind ports staffs of the issue and go fix their ports. :) Regards, -- / /__ __ Akinori.org / MUSHA.org / ) ) ) ) / FreeBSD.org / Ruby-lang.org Akinori MUSHA aka / (_ / ( (__( @ iDaemons.org / and.or.jp "Freeze this moment a little bit longer, make each impression a little bit stronger.. Experience slips away -- Time stand still" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86bspe4qhs.wl>