From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 24 01:12:29 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23B4BCE7; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 01:12:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (pancho.soaustin.net [76.74.250.40]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08580207F; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 01:12:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 6D85C5606D; Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:12:28 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:12:28 -0500 From: Mark Linimon To: David Chisnall Subject: Re: svn commit: r253563 - head/contrib/libstdc++/include/c_std Message-ID: <20130724011228.GB20455@lonesome.com> References: <201307231023.r6NANhGf065713@svn.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201307231023.r6NANhGf065713@svn.freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 01:12:29 -0000 On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:23:43AM +0000, David Chisnall wrote: > A surprising number of configure checks rely on this. It was broken by recent > cleanups to math.h. Once you have the experiences with the ports tree that I have had, you will no longer assume anything about how ports configure checks work (or many other similar items.) Whatever the number, I would hardly find it surprising. The quality of code in the ports collection varies wildly. Some of it is truly professional-quality. Some of it is written by people who cannot even tie their own shoelaces. The bulk of it is somewhere in the middle -- and many of those people simply do not have the patience or aptitude to understand the multitude of build and configure systems that are out there. We simply don't have the several thousand people that it would probably take to audit the tens of millions of lines of code involved. I would like to very politely suggest that regression testing such changes beforehand is a far more effective strategy -- both technical and inter-personal -- than simply assuming that either port authors or maintainers will get such issues correct. They can be subtle, and there are an indefinite number of them. mcl