From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Apr 19 21:24:59 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51BE8106566B;
	Sat, 19 Apr 2008 21:24:59 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (lefty.soaustin.net [66.135.55.46])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 315AC8FC16;
	Sat, 19 Apr 2008 21:24:59 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id 90DBB8C0B8; Sat, 19 Apr 2008 15:58:10 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 15:58:10 -0500
To: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org>
Message-ID: <20080419205810.GA16584@soaustin.net>
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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20080419093701.GJ4840@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon)
Cc: Max Laier <max@love2party.net>, Garance A Drosehn <gad@FreeBSD.org>,
	freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Integration of ProPolice in FreeBSD
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 21:24:59 -0000

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