On Monday, April 02, 2018 12:27:47 PM Ed Maste wrote: > On 31 March 2018 at 14:41, Mark Linimon <lini...@lonesome.com> wrote: > This is the most important point of this discussion: we do need to > ensure there's good communication and coordination between teams where > dependencies like this exist. I'll take the blame here: Dimitry asked > me about merging the Clang update to stable/11 and I agreed that it > was reasonable to merge sooner rather than later to have as much lead > time as possible before the 11.2 process starts. I also assumed that > outstanding Clang 6 issues in ports were farther along in being > addressed. > > The key lesson from this discussion is that for significant commits > and merges like this one we should make sure to always have sufficient > advance notice.
Is this driven by -mretpoline? That is, would we not be as aggressive with pushing for clang 6 in 11.2 if it weren't for that? I kind of feel like we probably wouldn't and would have left it at 5 and let clang 6 be a FreeBSD 12 thing. Was -mretpoline backported to clang 5 (I thought there was some talk of providing patches for clang 5)? -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
