Marcus, I'll provide some incompatibilities description, as many as I can do.
Thanks Oleg > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- > curr...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Marcus von Appen > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 3:40 AM > To: email@example.com > Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT > > Daniel Gerzo <dan...@freebsd.org>: > > > On 27.06.2012 10:43, Doug Barton wrote: > >> On 06/27/2012 02:09 AM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote: > >>> Doug, I'll post some performance figures, probably tomorrow. > >> > >> That's great, thanks. > >> > >>> But I do not agree with you that we have to reproduce the old sort > bugs. > >>> It makes no sense and I am not going to do that. Absolutely not. > >> > >> That isn't what I said. What I asked is for you to *test* the > existing > >> sort vs. the new one, and to report where the behavior is different. > >> That's a very basic part of any sort of "replace a core utility" > project > >> such as this one. > > > > [ snip ] > > > > Doug, are you implying that if we were about to import a new version > > of GNU sort, you would be asking for the same data? I believe we do > > not make this kind of work with any vendor code that is being > > updated in the base; I do not really understand why should Oleg or > > anyone else do this work when the bsdsort is compatible with a > > recent version of GNU sort. > > Seconded for -CURRENT. I think, we should at least provide some brief > document, whatsoever on incompatibilities with the sort implementation > that > is currently active in RELENG_9, no matter how buggy it is. > > This allows adopters and people, who have to migrate their production > systems > to identify and quantify the areas to change and perform some risk > management. > This also allows them to move more quickly to the new release, since > they > can start with the necessary changes earlier and plan ahead. > > We provide such changes usually in the release notes for various tools, > we > updated and I think that giving out such a document earlier will be > extremely > benefitial for companies, which have to deal with more than one or two > servers running FreeBSD, especially if we know that the currently > shipped > implementation is buggy and people most likely will have their own > workarounds > for that. > > Cheers > Marcus > > > _______________________________________________ > firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current- > unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
_______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"