From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct  4 04:50:21 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01BE16A41F
	for <freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>;
	Tue,  4 Oct 2005 04:50:21 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7653943D46
	for <freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>;
	Tue,  4 Oct 2005 04:50:21 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j944oLOS013075
	for <freebsd-ports-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 4 Oct 2005 04:50:21 GMT
	(envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id j944oLoE013074;
	Tue, 4 Oct 2005 04:50:21 GMT (envelope-from gnats)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 04:50:21 GMT
Message-Id: <200510040450.j944oLoE013074@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
From: "Maxwell N. Krohn" <krohn@MIT.EDU>
Cc: 
Subject: Re: ports/86475: New Ports: devel/sfslite-noopt and
 devel/sfslite-dbg; sfslite with different build options
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Maxwell N. Krohn" <krohn@MIT.EDU>
List-Id: Ports bug reports <freebsd-ports-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports-bugs>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-bugs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports-bugs>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 04:50:21 -0000

The following reply was made to PR ports/86475; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Maxwell N. Krohn" <krohn@MIT.EDU>
To: Renato Botelho <garga@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/86475: New Ports: devel/sfslite-noopt and devel/sfslite-dbg;
 sfslite with different build options
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 00:41:04 -0400 (EDT)

 Hi Renato,
 
 Yes, there is a good reason.  For those of us who use the SFS
 libraries to develop, we often want 3 different versions of the libraries
 around simultaneously.  The default options (compile with -O2) make
 code that runs much faster, perhaps twice as fast as compiling without
 optimization.  However, optimized code is very frustrating to debug.  So
 we often have debug builds of the software around.  Once a bug is fixed,
 it's back to the standard build until the next bug shows up.
 
 Along the same lines, running with DMALLOC enabled as in sfslite-dbg
 really slows things down, but is very useful for tracking down
 hard-to-find memory corruptions. It also has an extra dependency---
 devel/dmalloc.
 
 The ports are set up now in such a way that all 3 build modes can coexist
 peacefully. Thus, the three ports have different package lists. I'm pretty
 sure that doing them as one package with different options would mean one
 set of libraries clobbering the other.
 
 Pav and I discussed some of the issues after I intially submitted
 devel/sfslite, and I think in the end he was convinced.
 
 Thanks for your help.
 
 Regards,
 Max
 
 On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Renato Botelho wrote:
 
 > Is there a reason to don't include these new options
 > on sfslite port?
 >
 > Cheers
 > --
 > Renato Botelho
 >