Stuart Henderson <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2026/06/23 10:15, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > On 2026/06/23 02:36, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > I disagree.
> > > 
> > > This diff is many, many weeks old, and has effectively been ignored.
> > > There are multiple ports builders who did not incorporate it into their
> > > base system to explore what it does in ports.  I don't see a reason to 
> > > believe
> > > this diff is going to cause a problem.
> > 
> > We are only just (end of last week) clear of most of the noise and
> > failures from the llvm update, until that happened each build meant
> > softing through failures to figure out the cause. Before then it
> > would not have been a good time for a test build.
> > 
> > 
> > > I also think that is fair because renaud has shown he's pretty careful.
> 
> lex nfa.c wasn't.
> 

And why did that go wrong?   

Reply via email to