From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 12 14:15:55 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 809F216A601 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:15:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from karl@FS.denninger.net) Received: from FS.denninger.net (wsip-70-169-168-7.pn.at.cox.net [70.169.168.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB5443D72 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:15:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from karl@FS.denninger.net) Received: from fs.denninger.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by FS.denninger.net (8.13.6/8.13.1) with SMTP id k8CEFmDK011949 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:15:48 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from karl@FS.denninger.net) Received: from fs.denninger.net [127.0.0.1] by Spamblock-sys (LOCAL); Tue Sep 12 09:15:48 2006 Received: (from karl@localhost) by FS.denninger.net (8.13.6/8.13.1/Submit) id k8CEFlDK011946 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:15:47 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from karl) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:15:47 -0500 From: Karl Denninger To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060912141547.GA11713@FS.denninger.net> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <20060909173813.GA1388@FS.denninger.net> <45065C67.6040503@cs.tu-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45065C67.6040503@cs.tu-berlin.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Organization: Karl's Sushi and Packet Smashers X-Die-Spammers: Spammers cheerfully broiled for supper and served with ketchup! Subject: Re: ARRRRGH! Guys, who's breaking -STABLE's GMIRROR code?! X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:15:55 -0000 On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 09:06:15AM +0200, Bj?rn K?nig wrote: > Karl Denninger schrieb: > > >This is not cool folks. > > I think you misunderstood what -STABLE means. (Or maybe I do?) > > -STABLE is still a development branch without guarantee of a stable and > working operating system. -STABLE guarantees that interfaces remain > stable. If you want reliability then jump from release to release. > > Regards > Bj?rn You've never been able to get reliability by jumping from release to release, and every time someone comes in the lists to complain about something being broken in -RELEASE, the advice is to go to and track -STABLE! Guys, what's written in a handbook may be all well and good, but its what that matters - and this is what has "really happened" for the last ten years with FreeBSD! I don't think its too much to ask that before something is MFC'd back to -STABLE from -CURRENT that it be tested for the most common functionality (that is, does it work at all?) In this case all that someone had to do was boot the system and then detach and reattach a mirror component - the most basic of functionality - to detect that the patch was bad. That obviously wasn't done in this instance. I understand that finding corner cases and expecting exhaustive testing is unreasonable from a free project - even in a -RELEASE we don't get that. But this wasn't a corner case - it was a situation where absolutely zero testing was performed before the MFC was sent back to the source tree. -- -- Karl Denninger (karl@denninger.net) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do! http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING! http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind