In article <4ec40d98.4070...@netbsd.org>, Julio Merino <j...@netbsd.org> wrote: > >I know there is no portable way, but at least we can default to "do >nothing" if this is not supported. It's better than "not building" :-P
Oh, I can arrange that. #ifdef __NetBSD__ :-) But in my view this is worse... >Yes, they are small because this is just one change. But more may come. > I'll then have to go and rewrite all these local changes with >portability in mind. When the time to integrate a new release comes, >I'll have to mess around with lots merge conflicts, because the upstream >code will look nothing like what we have (hence why I asked for this to >be reviewed first). Well, this is the world we live in. Next time be the one to upgrade gdb or binutils or ssh and have to deal with 10-50K lines of diffs. You will not be complaining about a 100 line conflict after that :-) >Of course, if we assume I keep good track of all local changes and >integrate them upstream (I do try), I could ignore the local changes >altogether during the conflicts resolution and use the upstream >copies... but that's... dangerous because I can miss some little thing. > Specially if the local changes are made without tests, because then >it'll be impossible for me to spot when such changes are not preserved. I understand, and when I get more time I will write tests. I just wanted to stop our tests from failing in a non-hacky way quickly and I have achieved my goal with less than 30 minutes of coding. christos
