Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 01:43:22 +0700 From: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@grosbein.net> To: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>, "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> Cc: FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: breaking modules Message-ID: <5a9a751e-4042-57cb-5f34-e300e0050ad1@grosbein.net> In-Reply-To: <CAPyFy2BAazqi9vqjWwM94qEeF%2Bh5MBTTy94PbbNH-N-5w4_9_w@mail.gmail.com> References: <202204281527.23SFRbKU090763@fire.js.berklix.net> <CAPyFy2BAazqi9vqjWwM94qEeF%2Bh5MBTTy94PbbNH-N-5w4_9_w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
29.04.2022 21:49, Ed Maste wrote: > On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 at 11:28, Julian H. Stacey <jhs@berklix.com> wrote: >> >> but that's crude. It's nice to be able to build most modules ready >> in case wanted later, so how about a DUDS env. mechanism like ports/ ? > > I'd rather not add additional complexity to our build infrastructure > to address a situation that shouldn't exist. Modules should build & > function on an ongoing basis (and, I believe they generally do). CI > doesn't report any issues on either stable branch or main at present. Unfortunately, CI does not catch stand-alone module build failures, out of kernel build directory. For example: if_em https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/commit/?id=c0460cf2e42d2819c1f191a1d6e1b3dc0c7ea010 if_epair https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/commit/?id=7a382e744b0b0ba9b51dc34bfa0cd1515f744f25 linuxkpi https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/commit/?id=f5a2e7b0e8483bf51519046fd149a6a31acef6b1
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5a9a751e-4042-57cb-5f34-e300e0050ad1>