svn commit: r331880 - stable/11/etc

[Rodney W. Grimes]

[ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ]
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Kyle Evans <kevans at freebsd.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Right- so, back out this MFC (and the subsequent FreeBSD_version bump)
> >> and fix the ports to do the right thing for 12.x while that's still
> >> not a technically supported branch?
> >
> >
> > Don't back out the version bump. Other things may be riding along on it 'for
> > free'. Better to bump it again when you unMFC (if it's been more than a few
> > days since we've had one), and then yet-again when a fixed MFC happens.
> > Unless there's something you can ride along on for free :)
> >
> > Otherwise, that's a great plan.
> 
> Ok, I think the result of this thread and discussion with 0mp is the
> following set of actions:
> 
> 1.) One (1) commit to stable/11 to revert the MFC and bump
> FreeBSD_Version again for the removal
> 2.) One (1) commit to doc to document the new FreeBSD_Version
> 3.) Fixing ports to use the "new" behavior on 12, both the
> yet-to-be-patched ports and the ports that had already been patched
> under the assumption that it would still land first in 11.1-stable
> 4.) Documenting the original commit?
> 
> The hard part of point #3 has already been done by 0mp, who has
> submitted patches for all of the ports using this behavior. His
> patches will just need a bump of the version they're testing to the
> 12.x FreeBSD_Version and a fix-up on the patches that already landed.
> 
> For point #4, this seems like the type of breakage we should be
> documenting in release notes or something for the eventual upgrading
> of systems to 12.0. All usage of _limits stuff in custom rc scripts
> need to be audited, and all rc.conf(5)'s need to be scrubbed for
> ${name}_limits usage that doesn't make sense with the new context. I'm
> not sure what the most appropriate action here is, or what we should
> do this far ahead of time for such a thing.

We do need a way to stack little notes that need to make it into
the release notes, even if there is no single commit they are related
to, or in this case we find out later that a change had wider
impacts and needs to have a note added.  Maybe gjb@ has a place we
can just commit to that gets collected for the release?

> If this sounds like a good path forward, I'll execute #1 and #2 in the
> morning (CST, so ~11 hours from this e-mail being sent).

I am on board with this much of this plan.


What about cy@ changes to the ddb and other startup scripts?

-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes at freebsd.org