renaming, NBSD will support all
NGNU options.
Thank you for the suggestion.
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Doug Barton [mailto:do...@freebsd.org]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 2:02 PM
To: Oleg Moskalenko
Cc: FreeBSD Current
Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
-
From: owner-freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
curr...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Oleg Moskalenko
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 6:45 PM
To: FreeBSD Current
Subject: RE: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
Hi
As promised, I am supplying an example of comparison
Of Oleg Moskalenko
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 6:45 PM
To: FreeBSD Current
Subject: RE: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
Hi
As promised, I am supplying an example of comparison between several
sort programs.
The test file is a randomly generated 1,000,000 lines, each
On 06/29/2012 01:50 PM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
5) NBSD adds several of its own new proprietary options:
--mergesort
--qsort
--heapsort
--radixsort
--nthreads=... (multi-threaded build only)
Oleg,
First, thank you very much for providing both the performance numbers,
and the
-Original Message-
From: Doug Barton [mailto:do...@freebsd.org]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 2:02 PM
To: Oleg Moskalenko
Cc: FreeBSD Current
Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
On 06/29/2012 01:50 PM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
5) NBSD adds several of its own new
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Folks,
as I announced before, the default sort in -CURRENT has been changed
to BSD sort. Since the import, the reported minor bugs have been
fixed and BSD sort has passed the portbuild test. If you encounter any
problems or incompatibility with
On 06/27/12 08:04, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
Hi Folks,
as I announced before, the default sort in -CURRENT has been changed
to BSD sort. Since the import, the reported minor bugs have been
fixed and BSD sort has passed the portbuild test. If you encounter any
problems or incompatibility with
On 06/26/2012 11:04 PM, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
Hi Folks,
as I announced before, the default sort in -CURRENT has been changed
to BSD sort.
Has this been performance tested vs. the old one? If so, where are the
results?
Since the import, the reported minor bugs have been
fixed and BSD sort
-Original Message-
From: Doug Barton [mailto:do...@freebsd.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:18 PM
To: Gabor Kovesdan
Cc: FreeBSD Current; Oleg Moskalenko
Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
On 06/26/2012 11:04 PM, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
Hi Folks
On 06/26/2012 11:48 PM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
-Original Message- From: Doug Barton
[mailto:do...@freebsd.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:18 PM
To: Gabor Kovesdan Cc: FreeBSD Current; Oleg Moskalenko Subject:
Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
On 06/26
...@freebsd.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 1:35 AM
To: Oleg Moskalenko
Cc: Gabor Kovesdan; FreeBSD Current
Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
On 06/26/2012 11:48 PM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
-Original Message- From: Doug Barton
[mailto:do...@freebsd.org
On 06/27/2012 02:09 AM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
Doug, I'll post some performance figures, probably tomorrow.
That's great, thanks.
But I do not agree with you that we have to reproduce the old sort bugs.
It makes no sense and I am not going to do that. Absolutely not.
That isn't what I said.
On 27.06.2012 10:43, Doug Barton wrote:
On 06/27/2012 02:09 AM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
Doug, I'll post some performance figures, probably tomorrow.
That's great, thanks.
But I do not agree with you that we have to reproduce the old sort
bugs.
It makes no sense and I am not going to do
Daniel Gerzo dan...@freebsd.org:
On 27.06.2012 10:43, Doug Barton wrote:
On 06/27/2012 02:09 AM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
Doug, I'll post some performance figures, probably tomorrow.
That's great, thanks.
But I do not agree with you that we have to reproduce the old sort bugs.
It makes no
On 06/27/2012 03:02 AM, Daniel Gerzo wrote:
On 27.06.2012 10:43, Doug Barton wrote:
On 06/27/2012 02:09 AM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
Doug, I'll post some performance figures, probably tomorrow.
That's great, thanks.
But I do not agree with you that we have to reproduce the old sort bugs.
It
--- Mer 27/6/12, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org ha scritto:
...
I believe we do not
make this kind of work with any vendor code that is
being updated in the
base;
Au contraire, we frequently avoid updating the old versions
of things we have in the base precisely because they are
not
On 06/27/2012 07:30 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
--- Mer 27/6/12, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org ha scritto:
...
I believe we do not
make this kind of work with any vendor code that is
being updated in the
base;
Au contraire, we frequently avoid updating the old versions
of things we have
--- Mer 27/6/12, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org ha scritto:
...
Nope.
I would think only the maintainer of the package has
the
authority to make any request in the lines of being
bug-for-bug compatible
You have a seriously wrong idea of maintainer. The
community owns the software,
-Original Message-
But I do not agree with you that we have to reproduce the old sort
bugs.
It makes no sense and I am not going to do that. Absolutely not.
That isn't what I said. What I asked is for you to *test* the existing
sort vs. the new one, and to report where the
@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
Daniel Gerzo dan...@freebsd.org:
On 27.06.2012 10:43, Doug Barton wrote:
On 06/27/2012 02:09 AM, Oleg Moskalenko wrote:
Doug, I'll post some performance figures, probably tomorrow.
That's great, thanks
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 06/27/2012 07:30 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
--- Mer 27/6/12, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org ha scritto:
...
I believe we do not
make this kind of work with any vendor code that is
being updated in the
base;
Au
I officially withdraw from the discussion. I hope it all works out well.
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Ah, I just tried sort on freebsd (5.3.0) versus sort on macosx 10.6
(5.93) - what a strange bug.
We _could've_ fixed this with an import of the latest gnu sort and
then migrated to a feature/bug compatible bsdsort, but I do see your
point(s). :-)
There's a fine line to walk between keeping POLA
On 2012-06-27 08:04, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
Hi Folks,
as I announced before, the default sort in -CURRENT has been changed
to BSD sort. Since the import, the reported minor bugs have been
fixed and BSD sort has passed the portbuild test. If you encounter any
problems or incompatibility with
On Jun 27, 2012, at 8:56 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
So can we please stop pretending that it's me who's the problem, and
start looking at these things rationally?
What is your short list of issues? From a high level there appear to be none,
but the devil is in the details, eh?
From earlier in
-
From: olli hauer [mailto:oha...@gmx.de]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:56 AM
To: FreeBSD Current
Cc: Gabor Kovesdan; Oleg Moskalenko
Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
On 2012-06-27 08:04, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
Hi Folks,
as I announced before, the default
:56 AM
To: FreeBSD Current
Cc: Gabor Kovesdan; Oleg Moskalenko
Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] BSD sort is the default sort in -CURRENT
On 2012-06-27 08:04, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
Hi Folks,
as I announced before, the default sort in -CURRENT has been changed
to BSD sort. Since the import
On 2012.06.27. 10:34, Doug Barton wrote:
Great, can you post the results somewhere? I understand what you're
saying below that there are situations where worse performance may need
explanation, but it would be helpful if we had the data to look at.
If something is buggy than it is not comparable
On 2012.06.27. 8:11, O. Hartmann wrote:
... so, can I delete the entry
WITH_BSD_SORT=yes
in /etc/src.conf then?
Yes. BSD sort will still be the default. And if you want default GNU
sort, you can add WITH_GNU_SORT=yes.
Gabor
___
Hi
As promised, I am supplying an example of comparison between several sort
programs.
The test file is a randomly generated 1,000,000 lines, each line contain a
single floating point number.
We are going to sort it three ways - as text, as -n numeric sort, and as -g
numeric sort, with 4
30 matches
Mail list logo
