| 1 |
Ciaran McCreesh posted on Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:13:27 +0000 as excerpted: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Examples will merely be |
| 4 |
> dismissed as one-off cases that can be worked around, or as relying upon |
| 5 |
> a string of coincidences that will "obviously" never really happen, |
| 6 |
> right up until they do, at which point they'll be dismissed with a |
| 7 |
> WORKSFORME. What you have is a proof that it's broken, which is far |
| 8 |
> better than an example. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Actually, that "dismissed with WORKSFORME" strikes a chord, here. There |
| 11 |
was a very strange parallel make bug that I filed that was closed with |
| 12 |
that. I'd have really liked to see someone with some skill tackle it, as |
| 13 |
that was the only one I've ever seen that had striped fail and working |
| 14 |
zones, and I've have loved to see some logic as to why... (If -j10 |
| 15 |
failed, -j3 and -j15 might succeed, -l24 fail again, and -j33 succeed |
| 16 |
again...) Unfortunately, flameeyes, the only one I know who really gets |
| 17 |
into such things, was fresh out of the hospital at the time, and I think |
| 18 |
it was beyond the maintainer's abilities, so WORKSFORME was about the |
| 19 |
best that could be done. I've long since changed and changed again my |
| 20 |
makeopts, and don't remember the pkg now, tho I could probably find it in |
| 21 |
my old bug mail if I needed to. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
So I gotta admit you have a point, with that one. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 27 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 28 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives