From nobody Fri Nov 26 17:45:40 2021 X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A00B18ABC8C for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 17:45:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com (mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4J12GZ1RzZz3Bwx for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 17:45:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-vk1-xa2d.google.com with SMTP id 188so6447749vku.8 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 09:45:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=SAep5k3TpH5EwbAg+DbBH1XAJBS4LuuoV+I7tmzKefQ=; b=3oZ5hHIEI4+1WWbmsFzF8R1c0YtEhUOw9o3UQ+MFLlMWlAPoZsK4QJXHdyqvQHtX65 pW+7XWITkKs0J6RS6SFcgK+x+Z9c7Ub2EhcutubzVYPdUQ5Y69WEvHdT27aZ3XUY/zG6 JVW6ObWj/U6WVMWhnLVOa4wcRZaFcpBbrmIHEJjGC4UXv20JRnLbx3HVhG2iq3/lnimg NA9tira0+W8jMPoaZ1Gv9BjczCBIFmRpOEyGDsY+aJcRd8bjHD5tRX9FFNePrqBNeP32 skln/F9lTpFYoCtxbqGvkxATLY+SKDIsUduBNGhPa8oKFA5wDtHn1ltyXGLsooNeJqqD qe5A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SAep5k3TpH5EwbAg+DbBH1XAJBS4LuuoV+I7tmzKefQ=; b=tIKl28dcpxAa4VoPvuaab6wmWsLEZxTBWV9Wnv08JzfF2JwX6vxYGFioPdenn/pdwH Z3tcPs8bWBBUTgret4YT+cyt2slXStvrRikdd09JUlF0raQTluILmZ6FM6MZ//Rw/eCd CQhhbQNB4NQkqfaeHte4ghVeem/lWDdocNNaPItVd5ohimYbvqU/CNcJpiDvAbofvUlT nh0uvgcz5D4D1HNVM4AuVnX8/wWnUidPgF00yOqCtRFR/r1I3MQhK85bRQcbdongzz0j cG+So89G5IQZN7LFUcc5q6SpuuLi264guCFZCsrxYFB3OhTXaOqPpuzgN6RVHpq3OgAk 6KVw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533kKqbXSOlnvMIrktfvRdX+yNXivwfAE7FggEwL/CKWENh7yIuP SHkVPkoRf/5w33KepCLB7PKDrsMnPDLJCOTNJdYEyA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwaSxxvnR5AQw/Wxngo8jNWtDNzkY6i7VQELdJu5QeUnJkl2qDj8/RcWKOG8qkMYwBoV5eXZ18e37cvXVejWnQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:988:: with SMTP id g8mr21312883vkd.2.1637948750884; Fri, 26 Nov 2021 09:45:50 -0800 (PST) List-Id: Technical discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-hackers List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <202111261709.1AQH9sHg025507@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <202111261709.1AQH9sHg025507@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> From: Warner Losh Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 10:45:40 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Retiring WITHOUT_CXX To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: Ed Maste , FreeBSD Hackers Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000075042e05d1b4a9ad" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4J12GZ1RzZz3Bwx X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: Y --00000000000075042e05d1b4a9ad Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 10:11 AM Rodney W. Grimes < freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > > On Fri, 26 Nov 2021 at 04:09, Rodney W. Grimes > > wrote: > > > > > > So is the feature model of FreeBSD becoming, oh it gets broken > > > cause it is not regularly tested, so lets remove that feature. > > > > I don't agree with that. We have a large and growing CI infrastructure > > to regularly test functionality and are continually adding to it over > > time. But it's important to test and maintain what is actually used > > and is useful. Disabling C++ support made sense when obrien@ added the > > original knob in 2000, but it makes less sense today when parts of > > FreeBSD are written in C++. > > > > You can disagree with my assertion, but I shall continue to assert > that it *seems* as if rather than adding B O S to the CI such that > it is not only regularly tested, but continuously tested is the > correct path forward here. Testing all possible options takes on the order days. Testing all possible combinations takes much longer. It's not practical to test them all on every commit. It's computationally difficult. > Removing an option that seems to > break due to not beeing tested (your original assertion) is not > only false (I pointed out, and do know for a fact that Michael > Dexter runs BOS on a very regulary basis, infact near continously.) > and the wrong path forward. > I think you're missing the data here. While it's great that Dexter's BOS run finds things (don't get me wrong here), the fact that he's finding it with a BOS run w/o user reports of it being broken suggests that it's not very popular. > Fix the broken stuff, stop letting stuff rot because you don't care > to work on it, or because it is not being "tested". > We do have to stop and consider the bigger picture: is it an option that's useful enough to have it be one of the subset of things we test on a regular basis, and enforce some sort of pre-commit requirements for. Or is it an option we're content to test after the fact and have some sane plan for remediation? Or is it an option that we've slavishly carried forward from a time where it made a lot of sense to a time where the situation on the ground is such that it no longer makes sense? That's the discussion we're having here. Is it important enough to require everybody to pay attention to it or not... Warner --00000000000075042e05d1b4a9ad--