Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 15:58:10 -0500 From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) To: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> Cc: Max Laier <max@love2party.net>, Garance A Drosehn <gad@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Integration of ProPolice in FreeBSD Message-ID: <20080419205810.GA16584@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <20080419093701.GJ4840@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <20080418132749.GB4840@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <200804181945.59189.max@love2party.net> <20080418204738.GE4840@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <p0624080bc42eebc490b9@[128.113.24.47]> <20080419093701.GJ4840@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 11:37:01AM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > given that some ports simply don't compile with SSP (qemu, gcc4, > etherboot), my personal opinion is it should be enabled by default > for ports on -CURRENT in order to spot those out. Whate we generally do for sweeping changes like this is to first run them through an "experimental" build. This does two things: 1) the packages from this run don't get uploaded; 2) in almost all package runs, we only build the packages that will have changed since the last run. Thus, you don't get complete coverage. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080419205810.GA16584>