Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 28 Nov 2011 16:35:04 -0800
From:      Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc:        freebsd-current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, Max Khon <fjoe@samodelkin.net>
Subject:   Re: WITHOUT_PROFILE=yes by default
Message-ID:  <4ED428B8.8040909@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <66539.1322526789@critter.freebsd.dk>
References:  <66539.1322526789@critter.freebsd.dk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/28/2011 16:33, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <4ED4222E.5010707@FreeBSD.org>, Doug Barton writes:
>> On 11/28/2011 02:38, Max Khon wrote:
> 
>>> Are there any compelling reasons for having profiled libs to be built by
>>> default?
>>
>> Nope. It's been one of the first things I disable after I install a new
>> system for at least a decade.
>>
>> Ideally we could do this for 9.0.
> 
> Can we at least keep one (small) library compiled for profiling, so
> that compiling for profiling doesn't get broken by accident ?

I think WITH_PROFILE is probably a good idea for the tinderbox?


-- 

		"We could put the whole Internet into a book."
		"Too practical."

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4ED428B8.8040909>