From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 4 18:20:25 2008 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 5CFAF1065673; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 18:20:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C8928FC0A; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 18:20:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [84.49.246.2]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CAE6D44E; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 18:20:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 0335D844C4; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 19:20:23 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: Alfred Perlstein References: <49338E98.7020104@freebsd.org> <863ah8rvcd.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20081201132554.GD27096@elvis.mu.org> <20081201.221040.-1350500631.imp@bsdimp.com> <20081204095756.GP27096@elvis.mu.org> <863ah4158t.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20081204163542.GQ27096@elvis.mu.org> <86k5afyhrb.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20081204180837.GS27096@elvis.mu.org> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:20:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20081204180837.GS27096@elvis.mu.org> (Alfred Perlstein's message of "Thu, 4 Dec 2008 10:08:37 -0800") Message-ID: <86vdtzx0ns.fsf@ds4.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, kientzle@FreeBSD.org, "M. Warner Losh" , src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r185499 - head 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: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:20:25 -0000 Alfred Perlstein writes: > No, I'm trying to get a simple target that makes sense that will > prevent people from breaking tinderbox. (failing that then turning > tinderbox off because it's too complex) Perhaps if you tell me what it is about the tinderbox that you don't understand, I could help you understand it. > Lets just say it takes a developer about an hour or two to be > "enlightened" as to a new system instead of just being told "hey > run this one liner", you've just soaked up $number_of_committers * > $enlightenment_time man hours. What is new about the build system? And why do you think it's a bad idea for committers to understand how it works? Do you really want to run an operating system written by people who do not understand how it is built? > That and, since the process requires "enlightenment", you've caused > that developer to "page out" whatever they had in their head to work > on, _every time they commit_. Soooooo frustrating. I wonder - does anybody else than you have that problem? Don't you think that once people understand how the build system works, they would be able to do this without much thought? As a bonus, they will also know how to rebuild just the parts they modified, instead of the entire tree, shaving hours off the edit-compile-test cycle. > And I'm done too! But in the process, you managed to piss off just about everybody who had an interest in the matter. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no