Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 10:03:15 -0500 From: Jeremy Messenger <mezz.freebsd@gmail.com> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: toolchain@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th Message-ID: <CADLFttfMc-7EyKsdfcWWzb5fsrwYmw4qQAYiq6HDmViNjqArXg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120911122122.GJ37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <20120910211207.GC64920@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <20120911104518.GF37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20120911120649.GA52235@freebsd.org> <20120911122122.GJ37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote: <snip> > Can you, please, read what I wrote ? Fixing _ports_ to compile with > clang is plain wrong. Upstream developers use gcc almost always for > development and testing. Establishing another constant cost on the > porting work puts burden on the ports submitters, maintainers and even > ports users. > > I do strongly oppose the attempt to drain the freebsd resources by > forcing porters to port third-party code to other compiler. I agree with this pretty much. I haven't done fix any of port build with clang as I simply ignore clang (sorry). When user report to me and I tell them to stick with GCC as I don't support it. Cheers, Mezz -- mezz.freebsd@gmail.com - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLFttfMc-7EyKsdfcWWzb5fsrwYmw4qQAYiq6HDmViNjqArXg>