David Laight wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 10:46:27PM +0200, ptiJo wrote:
> > I would like to grab a -CURRENT source tree that is known to compile.
> 
> Why?  The 'current' current almost always compiles.

Hmmm.  Wondering what world you live in....  It didn't compile for me 
on Jun 10, 16, 18, 19, 20, 25, and Jul 04.  In the middle, there were 
problems with common things like printf and curses!  On the 4th, the 
entire thing "compiled", but then stopped due to flist inconsistencies.  
The first compile I've gotten to work in the past month was the 5th!


> If there are any bugs in the one you pick, then they are likely to
> be fixed almost immediately - so just update the sources and do an
> update build.
> 
> If you find any bugs (or what you think are bugs) then they are more
> likely to be looked at if you are running a true current, not something
> that happened to exist at some point last week.
> 
Maybe, but the only way out of the printf morass was to grab a 
pre-built version and blind install using tar -zxpf.

Thank heavens for releng!

I can certainly understand why somebody would prefer to compile from 
sources that are known to compile, especially for a first attempt.
-- 
William Allen Simpson
    Key fingerprint =  17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26  DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32