Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 17:40:26 -0500 From: Jon Disnard <diz@linuxpowered.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CVSUP and 5.2.1 RELEASE Message-ID: <40F464DA.4030501@linuxpowered.com> In-Reply-To: <27296.1089757404@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <27296.1089757404@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >In message <40F45FBC.6010709@corrupt.co.nz>, Drew Broadley writes: > > > >>If you are so much so complaining about the lack of 27 extra characters >>typed by users/admins, >> >> > >That is not the point we (or at least I) are complaining about, the >point is that neither removing the world target nor making it blatter >out a big multicolor linux style README is not a solution. > >The correct solution is the add whatever it takes to make the world >target fail if it is unsafe. > > > Ok that sounds good. I still think a verbose warning at the initiation of "make world" is a good thing though, but possibly only if DESTDIR is not something aside from root. So possibly a system to parse UPDATING, or whatever, for ABI changes and then halting the installworld stages of the world target? That seems good and bad, because sometimes people checkin without any documentation, and this idea would absolutely require anything with a potential to cause hazard to be documented with (or before) the associated checkin. Are all the commiters diligent enough to do that? Is there some other way we can have this idea of a "smart make world" that acknowledges the case of lazy documentation?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40F464DA.4030501>