From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 9 22:27:06 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 200861065751; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 22:27:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.208.78.105]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D33AE8FC21; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 22:27:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n29MR5fW050037; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:27:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n29MR5K2050036; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:27:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:27:05 -0700 From: Steve Kargl To: Andrew Thompson Message-ID: <20090309222705.GA49870@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <200903091922.n29JMjLR035306@svn.freebsd.org> <20090309194338.GA48593@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20090309195805.GA53225@citylink.fud.org.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090309195805.GA53225@citylink.fud.org.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Stanislav Sedov , svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r189594 - head X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 22:27:09 -0000 On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 12:58:06PM -0700, Andrew Thompson wrote: > Not sure if the problems you are referring to extend beyond your > previous mail about it being rushed, if so please advise. > > While the merge hasnt been perfect it couldnt have really been done > differently due to finite resources and I dont believe it was > unreasonable for a change in HEAD. > I have no problems with a transition for old USB to USB2 in HEAD. The manner of execution of the transition leaves much to desire. Don't the 20090215 and 20090216 entries in src/UPDATING send up a red flag that perhaps the people rushing USB2 into the tree might want to ask portmngr to build the port collection on pointyhat to gauge the damager? When Mark Linimon, a member of portmngr, posts on Feb 26th (http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2009-February/053282.html There appears to be a disconnect with USB2 development and the rest of FreeBSD. Don't the 20090223, 20090227, and 20090309 entries suggest to you that USB2 is going to get very limited testing by the actual user community? Asking users to rebuild world/kernel 2 or 3 times in a span of 20 days, and all the ports that use USB (with the hope that the ports actuall build) seems destiny to limit testing. After a complete build{world,kernel}/install{world,kernel} dance, including a 'make delete-old-libs' and a reboot. REMOVE:root[214] ll /usr/lib/libusb* -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel - 32136 Mar 9 14:33 /usr/lib/libusb.so.1 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel - 37580 Mar 5 05:01 /usr/lib/libusb20.a lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel - 13 Mar 5 05:01 /usr/lib/libusb20.so@ -> libusb20.so.1 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel - 39960 Mar 5 05:01 /usr/lib/libusb20_p.a -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel - 11874 Mar 9 14:33 /usr/lib/libusbhid.a lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel - 14 Mar 9 14:33 /usr/lib/libusbhid.so@ -> libusbhid.so.3 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel - 11284 Mar 9 14:33 /usr/lib/libusbhid.so.3 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel - 12240 Mar 9 14:33 /usr/lib/libusbhid_p.a It seems that libusb20 lives. -- Steve