Re: CVS commit: src/lib/libc/stdlib

[Joerg Sonnenberger]

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 11:07:24PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
 What do you think about the following patch:

No.

 In 90. division was an expensive operation, today not any more. I
 would prefer to let it to be optimized by a compiler, not by a human
 for a special or an old hardware with expensive arithmetic operations.

That's plainly wrong. A division is still slow and horribly slow on
quite a few CPUs we care about.

Joerg

Re: libutil shlib_version lossage

[Taylor R Campbell]

   Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 03:23:08 +
   From: Taylor R Campbell campbell+netbsd-source-change...@mumble.net

   Something very strange happened recently, which I noticed by tracing
   the forced update in joerg@'s Git mirror:

   [...]

   Whisky tango foxtrot?  Did someone botch a cvs admin?

From discussion with kamil@ in private, the answer is `yes'.  I
cleaned it up with some more cvs adminning, and made the change I
assume kamil@ intended to make (replace `shalib' by `shlib' in the
commit message).

This will cause another Git forced update, but with any luck, it
should restore the history from 2012 to a month ago as it was before
the botched cvs admin.

General reminder: cvs admin is dangerous business and can wreak all
sorts of havoc, and causes trouble for anyone following the Git
mirror.  If you think you want to do it, please

(a) ask yourself whether it's really warranted (one-character typo in
commit message?);
(b) notify source-changes-d if you made a serious mistake; and
(c) ask another developer to double-check your `cvs admin' invocation
first before you do it.


(That said: in spite of its danger, cvs admin is nevertheless not an
effective way to sneak changes into the CVS repository, because anyone
following the Fossil or Git mirror will notice.)