On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Florent Thoumie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Benjamin Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This patch has been sitting in GNATS for a couple of months now: > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/113132 > > > > I've received a few mails from people reporting success, and none > > reporting that bad things have happened. Is it possible to get this > > committed? > > It needs to go through an experimental build first. > > IMHO, this is an ugly hack. Ultimately, we're talking about marking > almost 20k ports as parallel-safe. > > Why not taking the opposite approach? Allow it by default, figure out > which ports break and why, fix where possible?
After talking with Pav, it seems it's still the best option as the breakage rate is quite high. -- Florent Thoumie [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD Committer _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
