Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 10:09:27 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> To: Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Release Engineering Status Report Message-ID: <3F6735B7.9050109@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <3F673285.8080903@potentialtech.com> References: <3F66A446.7090408@freebsd.org> <20030916131622.N54869@news1.macomnet.ru> <20030916200513.R4917@gamplex.bde.org> <3F672308.1080909@freebsd.org> <3F673285.8080903@potentialtech.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Bill Moran wrote: > Scott Long wrote: > >> Bruce Evans wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Maxim Konovalov wrote: >>> >>>> PAE MFC brought an incredible instability to stable branch. It >>>> affects 100% of our user community especially when we issued several >>>> SAs since PAE commit. They often can't switch to RELENG_4_x security >>>> branches because even RELENG_4_8 misses several critical non-security >>>> fixes. >>> >>> >>> I merged PAE into my version of -current a bit at a time and didn't >>> notice any problems (with PAE not actually configured) despite having >>> some large logical inconsistencies from not having all of it. Most >>> of the global changes had no effect since they just changed the names >>> of some typedefs without changing the underlying types in the !PAE >>> case. So I suspect that any instabilities in RELENG_4 in the !PAE >>> case are indirectly related to PAE and/or localized and thus easy to >>> find and fix. >>> >>> Bruce >> >> >> Agreed. PAE was merged into -stable in three steps. Backing out the >> third step and leaving the first two steps removes the instability. >> Unfortunately, it was the third step that also was the most complex. >> In any case, we have 2 weeks to find the resolution before the decision >> must be made on keeping or tossing PAE. Since PAE is a *highly* >> sought after feature, it would be doing a disservice to our user base >> to remove it without putting in some effort to fix it. > > > If someone who was involved in this would publish the date on which that > last commit was made, people who are experiencing problems, but wish to > stay as close to -STABLE as possible can use cvsup to revert their trees > to a date immediately prior to the commit. > > This will solve both problems for now: i.e. the problem of users wanting > the bugfixes/new features of -STABLE will have a target they can cvsup to > that is reliable, while the developers can continue to pursue their goal > of having PAE in 4.9. > Patches have been floated on the mailing list that revert PAE in its various stages. Maybe those need to be brought back up. Silby? Tor? Scotthome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3F6735B7.9050109>