svn commit: r358348 - in head/lib/libc: . gdtoa gen sparc64 sparc64/fpu sparc64/gen sparc64/sys sys

[Warner Losh]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:10 PM Bjoern A. Zeeb <
bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net> wrote:

> On 26 Feb 2020, at 18:55, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> > Author: imp
> > Date: Wed Feb 26 18:55:09 2020
> > New Revision: 358348
> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/358348
> >
> > Log:
> >   Remove sparc64 specific parts of libc.
>
> I have a silly question for which it’s long been too late, but for the
> next time .. why do we need a gazillion of commits to remove sparc64
> rather than 1 “atomic” one (or maybe 2 in case the one missed a bit)
> to remove it all (which would also allow other people to bring it back
> into private trees a lot more easily compared to tracking changes over
> weeks)?
>

One atomic commit is harder and more work for me.

It's hard to get all the details right before pushing it. It's hard to
develop it as other things in the tree change things which leads to more
conflicts. It can be hard to MFC around (though these changes won't be
MFC'd having too large a commit around them may generate more conflicts
when those things are MFC'd). So I optimized for my convenience, not others
wishing to import it into their trees. But I'd contend that the delta as
far as bringing back as 10 commits isn't onerous for such a niche demand.

We don't remove entire architectures often, and we usually do because they
work poorly at best.

Warner