svn commit: r365643 - head/bin/cp

[Warner Losh]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:17 PM Kyle Evans <kevans at freebsd.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 17:02 Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:55 PM Kyle Evans <kevans at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:53 PM Ian Lepore <ian at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, 2020-09-22 at 15:50 -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
>>> > > I think it's a great leap sideways, but I've done cp /dev/null foo to
>>> > > clear
>>> > > it out for 35 years now... It's why it feels like a workaround.
>>> > >
>>> > > Though it is a legit optimization, no matter the feelings. As for
>>> > > clearer,
>>> > > I'm less sure since then I have to remember what the : operator does.
>>> > >
>>> > > Warner
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > For me, :> is idiomatic (but ugly).
>>> >
>>> > On the other hand, the cp /dev/null had a nice dogfooding aspect to
>>> > it... when we broke cp by accident, its use in the build system was the
>>> > first alarm to go off.
>>> >
>>> > --Ian
>>> >
>>>
>>> To be honest, this is a case that really should be covered by
>>> regression tests somewhere.
>>>
>>
>> It should (but isn't yet).
>>
>> Ian is right for old-school FreeBSD thinking. In that thinking the build
>> system should use an eclectic mix of tools to act as a fire-wall against
>> accidental breakage.
>>
>> Complete, effective, test suites give much better coverage... if they are
>> run...
>>
>> So until we run tests frequently, with loud regression squawking that's
>> as effective as build breakage, I tend to fall in the 'all of the above'
>> camp until that's in place... :)
>>
>> Warner
>>
>> P.S. though not, if I suppose, if it means that we're slowing down the
>> regression coverage uptake...
>>
>
> --
>
> The test build was fine, please confirm if I can commit it or if someone
> else would like to write the UPDATING notice or start bootstrapping cp on
> systems that were affected. I'm not comfortable with not taking any path at
> all here, but this is a lot of friction for a small mechanical change to
> ease the pain.
>

Sorry if I wasn't clear: I'm not objecting to the quick mechanical change
so much as complaining that I wish we had better test coverage. Don't let
that stop you from doing what's right (or I can if you'd like).

Warner