From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jul  5 20:54:46 2004
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A3BE416A4CE; Mon,  5 Jul 2004 20:54:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8208343D2F; Mon,  5 Jul 2004 20:54:46 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id EF0C1148C3; Mon,  5 Jul 2004 15:54:45 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 15:54:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
X-X-Sender: linimon@pancho
To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>
In-Reply-To: <20040705194829.GA3743@dragon.nuxi.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0407051547040.16044-100000@pancho>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG
cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG
cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@FreeBSD.ORG>
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/examples/etc make.conf
X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 20:54:46 -0000

On Mon, 5 Jul 2004, David O'Brien wrote:

> Because most everything in the ports collection was developed on Linux
> using -O2.  The bugs are in our code, not gcc's -O2.

most != all.  Are you volunteering to field the PRs for the others?

My personal opinion is that our priorities should be to get the
current number of PRs down as low as possible, to fix as many of
the ports that do not build on the various architectures as we can,
and to fix all the fetching problems as noted in Fenner's portsurvey.
With respect to the first two, we are either holding our own or
making slight progress; with respect to the latter, we are falling
behind.

If someone wants to set up a box to do regression testing on -O2,
by all means, they should go for it, but by no means do I feel that
it should be the default.

My opinion on this is subject to change if e.g. we get an influx of
new volunteers.  We can always use them.

mcl