On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Jason Edgecombe <[email protected]>wrote:
> Marc Dionne wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Ken Hornstein<[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >>> I think that historically, head and 1.5.x have simply scared >>>> developers into using 1.4 as a base. I recall a period of close to a >>>> year (maybe more) where head wouldn't even build on Linux when rxtcp >>>> was in there, and 1.5 was usually not that much better. >>>> >>>> >>> rxtcp was always on a branch; if you selected that branch, you should >>> have >>> known what you were getting in to. >>> >>> --Ken >>> >>> >> >> You're right that it wasn't rxtcp, I think it was >> bringing-rx-into-21st-century-20060504 which was later taken out of >> head with taking-rx-back-into-the-20th-century-20061228. >> >> My point was not the specific breakage (there were surely other things >> as well), but more the fact that at least on Linux, head was not >> buildable for quite a long time. >> >> > Do the tinderbox test boxes help to alleviate this? Yes, somewhat. Any idea what's wrong with HPUX? Me either. Compiler SEGVing isn't really something one can sensibly do something with.
