From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 9 11:06:14 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F38B1065670; Tue, 9 Jun 2009 11:06:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 685C08FC13; Tue, 9 Jun 2009 11:06:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A64646B2E; Tue, 9 Jun 2009 07:06:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 12:06:13 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20090608.164518.-1264106964.imp@bsdimp.com> Message-ID: References: <200906081823.n58INhX8038125@svn.freebsd.org> <20090608.164518.-1264106964.imp@bsdimp.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, ed@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r193734 - in head: lib/libusb sys/amd64/amd64 sys/i386/i386 sys/i386/xen sys/sys X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:06:15 -0000 On Mon, 8 Jun 2009, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <200906081823.n58INhX8038125@svn.freebsd.org> > Ed Schouten writes: > : It turns out our compiler in stable/7 can't build this code anymore. > : Even though my opinion is that those people should just run `make > : kernel-toolchain' before building a kernel, I am willing to wait and > : commit this after we've branched stable/8. > > As a matter of policy, the project has always supported a RELENG_X -> > CURRENT upgrade with a simple buildworld. The issue of building a kernel by > hand across releases has been targeted as one of those areas that can break, > but only if there's a really good reason to do so. > > Just FYI to everybody.. As compared to building 7.x kernels on 6.x, we got significantly farther through the release process before bumping into a problem, FWIW. I certainly appreciate the ability to short-cut builds by doing them incrementally with existing toolchains, and while there are good reasons to break that (such as taking advantage of new syntax to improve the kernel -- for example, C99 structure initialization) my hope is generally to avoid breaking it unless such a good reason turns up. Usually, in the past, it's been share/mk incompatibility that's broken the build rather than C syntax, though. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge