On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 04:46:05PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 12:38:13PM -0500, Karl Denninger wrote:
> > This is not cool folks.
>
> I'm really sorry for the breakage. I'm trying to treat -STABLE very
> gently, unfortunately this time I made a mistake.
>
> The change was committed to HEAD at 9 August. The change fixed one bug,
> but introduced another, which I didn't expected. The change seemed to be
> trivial and I only tested that it fixes the bug I was tracking down, I
> haven't looked for regressions.
>
Well, after this lengthy discussion, I've switched to -RELEASE.
-STABLE just ain't... We all realize that none of us would
put out a buggy release--not even -CURRENT. But let me ask
the next obvious question. How difficult would it be to
build a regression test, or suite of tests? Obviously, this
could be done over months -> years. (In my last lifetime
as a hacker I was in the kernel test group [a BSD-4.4 based
release on new architecture]. ) It's a bit hard to believe
that with all the genius in this effort, that no regression
testing is done.
gary
--
Gary Kline [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.thought.org Public service Unix
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
