Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 00:07:28 +0100 From: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Andrew Thompson <thompsa@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r189594 - head Message-ID: <200903100007.28979.max@love2party.net> In-Reply-To: <20090309222705.GA49870@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <200903091922.n29JMjLR035306@svn.freebsd.org> <20090309195805.GA53225@citylink.fud.org.nz> <20090309222705.GA49870@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 09 March 2009 23:27:05 Steve Kargl wrote: > 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 There is a clear chicken-egg problem here. This is current (aka the bleeding edge) for a reason. This is the place where painful operations like this happen from time to time and users can either live with the pain that sometimes comes with running current or hold off on updating while the problems are being worked out. Better yet, pitch in with constructive reports on specific problems and maybe possible solutions. Complaining, esp. without specific problem reports, is - IMHO - not an option. Remember that all this is done so that things will be in order when 8.0 comes. Judging from my experience with USB2 - things will not only be in order, but also in far better shape then they have been for a long time now. So please, get off the back of those that stepped up to take care of this vital piece of software and let them do their work - better yet, help with this truly thankless job with specific problem reports and maybe investigating solutions. All this nay-saying isn't helping at all. > 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. -- /"\ Best regards, | mlaier@freebsd.org \ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | mlaier@EFnet / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200903100007.28979.max>