Jonathan Perkin <jperkin%joyent.com@localhost> writes: >> [1] What's keeping this, anyway? > > I don't know but I'd like to see it happen 12 months ago. The > difference in reduced build/system time is astonishing and I've used > it for all my builds for a long time now. Perhaps you could start a new thread with the accumulated evidence that enabling cwrappers does no harm, in terms of missing packages in bulk builds, and packages that can't be build normally, on various platforms. Because I haven't seen a "here is the data; I think we're over the bar", I have been under the impression that we hadn't yet arrived at time to flip the default. Also, it seems one probably has to re-bootstrap. I am unclear on what the effect on NetBSD itself is and how that would happen, in terms of changing the default and getting existing systems moved over. (I have no bias against it; I just haven't personally arrived at "if it is changed, I am sure nothing bad will happen that won't be fixed in a few days".) > The sooner we can kill legacy wrappers the better. Removing the old wrappers is a separate question from changing the default, I would think. It definitely seems safer to have at least two quarterly branches with cwrappers enabled on all platforms without any unfixable issues turning up before actually removing the code.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature