On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 03:15:25PM +1000, John Birrell wrote: > On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 01:07:15AM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > But you seem to thing -pthread == NOOP unbreaks ports ;-) > > Warner might, but Kris doesn't. Kris is asking for the -pthread option > to be restored to let -current users breath easy while the task of updating > the ports goes on. Then he's happy for it to become a noop. > > I susect theat this puts much of the work on a few people rather than many. > I hope it doesn't require a volley of emails to each port maintainer to > resolve each one. People have jumped off buildings for less than that!
I expect it's about a dozen man-hours of work, or so, if there's a group of people working on the problem. If left to the individual maintainers to solve, it will take a lot longer in wall clock time, and we'll probably end up with a bunch of incorrect fixes. It should be no trouble at all to find volunteer port committers to help with the task. Kris
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
