From owner-freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Sun Jul 16 00:12:08 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3247B7ED2C for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 00:12:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-vk0-x230.google.com (mail-vk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78BB063B31 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 00:12:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-vk0-x230.google.com with SMTP id f68so58541922vkg.2 for ; Sat, 15 Jul 2017 17:12:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=NkCLT5Jke3dVSK5TKOFB+C4a9u9k+2aGQqhE1G0IHBk=; b=zsFEVrFTqpe/ezvSvw5s2SYf4FnQrPhFxCS/5cSHOaPK7LL+0NDhXoAw18ZTBmFrUe kwMUNu+WU9sr0XNOW2goNYCjyepYTboMlAdqaaC5TsZP+2MXfjgjFyP1IujNhRZu2dcJ dFszPPIrHRrYGKKY461M6Yy/ACeA+tVi3o0ihBxE4jPiFg81ic1xf2HUM1B41BXEXoe5 QAs2GyJVe+K7lGXcxepFSjBfpnmpV9kCKvw7osHv66Gans6bIKV9pzIBwC5TKvonwZLJ Gr5zP8VuymHAn5PWeO30y6egsop3TV4U3Y4LBMDmBHfw3P+b/h1Kekf33+YWihIjWM7D LJzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=NkCLT5Jke3dVSK5TKOFB+C4a9u9k+2aGQqhE1G0IHBk=; b=lgGzZxVfDutcRQlgU74tyh5LQsXheM1eNJwfSnCnAycsXID4wwuW1J2qTuUEVCDahb /EoHgjdeBIiSrK1nTKaI5dpbzwPcSjst5u8WMmInl/lmQ0+HvY1k03A/IB8Ltc4RZjKP 9mXgEHKGWU2rG8zGE3pi5gFE67eP7/H8PNZXIgkPMjkbXxiKWN/8evCme+V+ci2RSwOV VtL2/yckpaCK8JkuTiDuI2mKv/umYKBiDp/XMguAr2i+MowrjqQb6R40p5qXTOr6S0Jw VScrMJ7hPtIzm4/6qOx5w4k3a437GWB5zSLHR+UY5Zdcsn8QqzWTh5evcRqEdipiEjZt NviQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111okuag4hkfYzxhLtPzFTYKIO0ZMHdljNpRlURs8YGjZO99cEw4 iYbe0MgzNanstxucxW9jS9nK7JlM9vWl X-Received: by 10.31.167.68 with SMTP id q65mr8931905vke.45.1500163927608; Sat, 15 Jul 2017 17:12:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.103.36.1 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Jul 2017 17:12:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [50.253.99.174] In-Reply-To: References: From: Warner Losh Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 18:12:07 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: wRPR2CdYDjc985wP_rtmAHyNIUk Message-ID: Subject: Re: suggestion for toolchain to have its own directories To: Sid Cc: "freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 00:12:08 -0000 On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Sid wrote: > How about going with a toolchain directory for the base system only. It > would use shared files, and have subdirectories specific to clang, gcc, o= r > other compiling components or versions. This way it is both modular and > organized. > And non-standard. Auxiliary tools that know about toolchains would need to be modified. That's a losing fight. > For instance: /usr/toolchain/bin/, /usr/toolchain/sbin/, and > /usr/toolchain/lib/ can be used for shared files. /usr/toolchain/clang/, > /usr/toolchain/gcc/, etc, and their (lib, sbin, bin, include) > subdirectories can be used for specifically needed files. The old > directories can be softlinked to there. > Old directories won't cut it. > Any drastic changes can only be tried in the head branch. Port compilers > should definitely be left alone, by not using /usr/local/toolchain/* at a= ll. > Yea, I think this is a bad idea. There's no upside to it, other than appealing to somebody's sense of what's organized. The downsides are plenty and create a lot of work for us just to get back to where we are today. Unless there's a truly compelling reason to do this, my vote, and loud shouting voice, says don't do it. Warner > > Sat Jul 1 10:01:29 UTC 2017, David Chisnall > wrote: > >Debian does something like this, and it=E2=80=99s a huge pain to work wi= th. The > problem is that toolchains are not self-contained >monolithic components > (though gcc likes to pretend that they are). For example, we want gcc and > clang to use the same >linker, the same C and C++ standard library > implementations, and the same system headers, irrespective of the compile= r > >version. Things that actually are private to a compiler are in separate > directories (see /usr/lib/clang, for example). > > > Fri Jun 30 21:13:32 UTC 2017, Mark Millard wrote= : > >commonality helps with making ports and such easier > >to support as an example. The types of systems are not > >completely independent. > ... > >Reorganizations are a big deal and do not happen > >often. > ... > >It is also messy for ports to organize things differently > >than upstream does. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-toolchain- > unsubscribe@freebsd.org"