From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 31 16:29:28 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD48A106566B; Tue, 31 May 2011 16:29:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57E7D8FC16; Tue, 31 May 2011 16:29:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.30.101.53] ([209.117.142.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p4VGNkNc014197 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 31 May 2011 10:23:47 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 10:23:40 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4D934AF4.9080503@FreeBSD.org> <742085CD-7F6F-4879-9FFD-517EC3203D52@bsdimp.com> <5AF348C8-6AB6-490D-A12E-89A51528F58F@bsdimp.com> To: Arnaud Lacombe X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (harmony.bsdimp.com [10.0.0.6]); Tue, 31 May 2011 10:23:49 -0600 (MDT) Cc: mdf@FreeBSD.org, "Robert N. M. Watson" , Dimitry Andric , freebsd-hackers Subject: Re: Include file search path X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 16:29:28 -0000 On May 22, 2011, at 9:48 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > Hi Warner, >=20 > On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >>=20 >> On Apr 2, 2011, at 1:10 PM, Robert N. M. Watson wrote: >>=20 >>> On 2 Apr 2011, at 19:47, Warner Losh wrote: >>>=20 >>>>> (2) Working clang/LLVM cross-compile of FreeBSD. This seems like = a basic >>>>> requirement to adopt clang/LLVM, and as far as I'm aware that's = not yet a >>>>> resolved issue? >>>>=20 >>>> 0 work has been done here to my knowledge. The world view for = clang and our in-tree gcc differ which makes it a challenge. >>>=20 >>> That's disappointing. I seem to recall it's more an issue of our = build integration with clang/LLVM than an underlying issue in = clang/LLVM? >>=20 >> Yes. The problem isn't hard, the cross compile paradigm is just a = little different. >>=20 >>>>> We (Cambridge) are currently bringing up FreeBSD on a new = soft-core 64-bit MIPS platform. We're already using a non-base gcc for = our boot loader work, and plan to move to using clang/LLVM later in the = year. The base system seems a bit short on detail when it comes to the = above, currently. >>>>=20 >>>> Yes. I've had to add about a dozen changes so far to get close to = building with xdev compilers. A similar number are needed to make it = easy to configure and add systree support, I think. >>>=20 >>> Sounds like great progress -- do you think we'll ship 9.0 in a "just = works" state with regard to this? >>=20 >> I sure hope so. I'd like to have demoable stuff by BSDcan. >>=20 > BSDCan has passed, has there been any advance made since that = discussion ? It is "demonstrable" but not ready to commit to the tree. Needs about 4 = hours of work that I've had trouble scheduling on it due to work getting = busier than I expected. Warner