From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Mon Nov 20 01:40:55 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@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 ADA89DDD0AB for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 01:40:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pfg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 75F8B6AEFA for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 01:40:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pfg@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 84728 invoked by uid 99); 20 Nov 2017 01:40:49 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 01:40:49 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.8] (unknown [186.80.205.98]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id DAA8E1A003E; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 01:40:47 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Subject: Re: svn commit: r325954 - in head: . share/mk sys/conf usr.sbin/config From: Pedro Giffuni In-Reply-To: <4DCBA4BA-1803-4B8F-B232-7558227E4002@dsl-only.net> Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 20:40:40 -0500 Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <297A2FDE-6105-4F64-921B-9510066F0420@FreeBSD.org> References: <59284FA3-1659-49D0-A860-366B98B02209@dsl-only.net> <26aaac2e-01d5-a11c-1182-39363d5cafc5@FreeBSD.org> <4DCBA4BA-1803-4B8F-B232-7558227E4002@dsl-only.net> To: Mark Millard X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 01:40:55 -0000 > On Nov 19, 2017, at 19:11, Mark Millard wrote: >=20 > [As long as things do not go the direction of > eliminating gcc 4.2.1 being able to do buildworld > and buildkernel for certain architectures, I > agree that this would stay an off-topic subject.] >=20 > On 2017-Nov-19, at 3:43 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >=20 >> .... >> On 19/11/2017 17:38, Mark Millard wrote: >>> Pedro Giffuni pfg at FreeBSD.org wrote on >>> Sun Nov 19 15:29:33 UTC 2017 : >>>=20 >>>> Yes, we should >>>> avoid breaking existing stuff (however old) in ports but no one is >>>> expecting to build modern FreeBSD with gcc 3.4 or even gcc 4.1. We = did >>>> what we could with gcc 4.2.1 but it's time is also over. >>> Unfortunately for powerpc64 no alternative >>> works fully. For example: >>>=20 >>> A) With a buildworld by clang and C++ programs linked against >>> the system libraries, any C++ exception thrown causes the >>> program to crash: clang generates bad code in the library. >>>=20 >>> B) Modern gcc's build a lib32 based on generating a messed up >>> crtbeginS.o content (bad register usage) and so 32-bit >>> programs crash. >>>=20 >>> As far as I know gcc 4.2.1 is still the only environment that >>> generally works for powerpc64. >> Hmm ... >> At some point some of the newer GCC was generating good code. >> I have had reports of openoffice-devel working on FreeBSD powerpc64 = and, >> even on x86, openoffice stopped building with our base gcc. >=20 > openoffice likely does not depend on lib32 (support of 32-bit > code under a powerpc64 environment) even being present, much > less working? >=20 Yes, right: it=E2=80=99s pretty native: either all 64 bit or all 32 = bit.. The port had endianness issues but once Curtis Hamilton fixed those the = port worked. For the record: AOO generally needs two things: working java and a = low-level "bridges" code. I don=E2=80=99t have access to the platform but patches to build the = arch-dependent =E2=80=9Cbridges=E2=80=9D code with clang would be very = welcome. > As far as I know, for powerpc64 WITHOUT_LIB32=3D buildworld, > devel/powerpc64-gcc is sufficient. It is WITH_LIB32=3D coverage > that makes it insufficient overall. Anything that does not > depend on lib32 likely works as well as on other architectures. >=20 >>> [There is no devel/powerpc-gcc like there is a devel/powerpc64-gcc >>> and I've never managed to to make a working powerpc build from a >>> gcc other than 4.2.1 . (A) prevents clang from counting as working >>> overall. So powerpc may be in the same boat as powerpc64 as far as >>> having a known way to build without gcc 4.2.1 goes.] >> At least PPC64 is alive, I am afraid that I don't see a solution for = sparc64. >=20 > I do not have direct experience for sparc*'s but I'd > not be surprised. >=20 >> But this is very off-topic to lint issue :). >=20 > As long as things do not go the direction of > eliminating gcc 4.2.1 being able to do buildworld > and buildkernel for certain architectures, I > agree that this would stay an off-topic subject. >=20 I have no interest in killing any platform but we are reaching a point = where, other than being unmaintained, gcc-4.2.1 won=E2=80=99t be able to = build newer clang or gcc. Pedro.