On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 10:46:36AM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 31.03.2010 at 17:12:30 -0700, Philip Guenther <guent...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > The i386 build has been around a lot longer than amd64, so comparing
> > absolutes doesn't reveal the relative rate.
>
> that doesn't sound compelling to me, as, afair, the serial numbers
> are reset on every release. Eg. I can see this on one machine:
>
> $ what /bsd.old
> /bsd.old
> OpenBSD 4.3 (GENERIC) #698: Wed Mar 12 11:07:05 MDT 2008
>
> Now, with -current, serial numbers for i386 are in the range of 4xx,
> which is much lower than 698.
>
> > You don't say _why_ it would matter to you, so I can't answer
> > _whether_ it would matter to you. What problem are you trying to
> > solve?
>
> I am interested in how these things work internally in your project,
> and I also wondered whether I'd done something wrong (eg. inadvertantly
> fetched stale code), as, at first, I assumed that all these builds
> should occur in sync. Now, when I was reporting problems, the large
> difference in serial number struck me as odd, and curiosity set in.
>
>
> Kind regards,
> --Toni++
You are chasing ghosts. Sometimes build machines get replaced, disks
die and sometimes the person building the kernels just likes to reset
the number.
Yo are attaching meaning to something that hasn't.
-Otto
