Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 31 May 2010 14:23:25 +0200
From:      Daniel Nebdal <dnebdal@gmail.com>
To:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [TESTING]: ClangBSD branch needs testing before the import to  HEAD
Message-ID:  <AANLkTil6hCVBhBwBbbEpdQXIJMfYpVxFuPLegzXHzylS@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100531120429.GU83316@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
References:  <20100529130240.GA99732@freebsd.org> <20100530135859.GI83316@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <508DA8CE-749A-46B4-AF0B-392DB08CBBCD@samsco.org> <20100531095617.GR83316@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20100531102452.GA33192@freebsd.org> <20100531104631.GT83316@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20100531113950.GA44552@freebsd.org> <AANLkTimwPBwPHXrURK81M9XVfdWYqs5yCoW2V3czqryW@mail.gmail.com> <20100531120429.GU83316@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote:
(...)
> From what it was claimed, even without the import, users can install
> whatever compiler from ports, set CC and start the build. Essentially,
> the import blesses the clang and its current state as ready for wide use.
>

Not necessarily. If it is
- disabled by default
- not recommended anywhere
- recommended against for production usage (I suspect it will carry
the usual "might set your dog on fire" - disclaimer for a while)

that's hardly a glowing recommendation.  I'm not sure if it's the best
comparison, but it reminds me of how SCHED_ULE was available but
mostly ignored until it was made default.

-- 
Daniel Nebdal



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTil6hCVBhBwBbbEpdQXIJMfYpVxFuPLegzXHzylS>