Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 23:57:17 -0600 From: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" <jeff-ml@mountin.net> To: Chris BeHanna <behanna@zbzoom.net> Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /etc/make.conf question Message-ID: <4.3.2.20020313231107.02fc86b0@207.227.119.2> In-Reply-To: <20020313185236.T35428-100000@topperwein.dyndns.org> References: <og7kog9kdj.kog@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 06:57 PM 3/13/02 -0500, Chris BeHanna wrote: >On 13 Mar 2002, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: > > > "Jeffrey J. Mountin" <jeff-ml@mountin.net> writes: > > > > > No matter, it's not good to publicly suggest non-standard procedures. > > > > Wheewww. Matthew and I can consider ourselfs fortunate that we made no > > suggestions. Am more for not trying to confuse those new to the system. Besides, we do have all the wonderful docs that so much work was done on. ;) No matter, I had a moment of forgetfulness (was thinking of the old kernel build method) combined with a flashback to the time of the introduction of the current "official" build method. A lot of cluesticks flying around back then. Kris did point out one reason on another thread. A user finds that one can combine targets and later learns about -j and then odd things happen. A timely example why being more pedantic might matter down the road. Frankly seeing how many commands or keystrokes one can save is absurd. Write a wrapper script then or use an alias. Yes, those of us that have been around do odd things and they work most times. Other times, well... 8-) > > > Better to pull and wait at least a short time before building to ensure > > > one has all the commits of a change. > > > > The wait won't ensure that, of course. How DOES one ensure that? > > I cvsup at least twice. If I get no changes the second time, I'm >reasonably certain that what I have is not a mid-commit snapshot. Or in the middle of the mirror updating. Trouble is there are some that might be spacing commits out. I've seen enough overnight (depending on commiter and observer location) sprees to know that even 2 pulls in a row might not be "safe" and if there are forgotten bits, which did happen recently... Will say the person with the orange cone did apologize on what seems like half a dozen threads for the same breakage. As pointed out by Mike Meyer one should also check the list before reporting, though some blame will go to slow mail servers for the number of different threads for the same problem. Like him I prefer doing each step and save the output for comparison and 'time' it as well. ..., it doesn't matter if the timing was bad. With experience and dedicated reading of the commit mail, that everyone tracking -stable should read, one might know when a "bad" time to pull source is. Then I'd be asking too much. <g> Pulling and waiting a day means there has been time to find it and most times the person that broke things will figure it out or realize a commit was overlooked (and hope no one noticed) and might not be a bad idea for those new to thing here. Just a suggestion for some that seem to have problems, those new, and something worth thinking about passing on. Seems to be a rash of them lately. <shrug> back to lurker mode... Jeff Mountin - jeff@mountin.net Systems/Network Administrator FreeBSD - the power to serve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.20020313231107.02fc86b0>