On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Theo de Raadt <[email protected]> wrote: >> Note that these are all *deliberate design choices* in OpenBSD and its ports >> tree, >> not a limitation of the tool. > > It follows the 'eat our own dogfood' principle. We only have so many machines > and developers around to eat our own dogfood, so we don't do cross > compilations. > > That would require more machines, or more people watching more machines, or > looked at from the other side, it would mean less watching of the specific > cases that matter the most (ie. native). > >> Those all come from lack of manpower with respect to expected quality of the >> results. > > Right. > > We run on many architectures, because it helps improve the quality. > > Running via cross compilers? That's does not improve the quality of > the resulting native output in any way. > > t might improves the quality of the cross compilation environment, or > the compiler itself, but that is not where our core responsibilities > lie. And anyways, it is rather apparent that those who have that as > a core responsibility also have far fewer cross-targets in mind than > might be useful (ie. walk off their map, and you'll step in mud).
Perfect. Many thanks to all.
