Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 25 Jan 2013 21:03:46 -0500
From:      Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Removing default build of gcc
Message-ID:  <51033982.4020301@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <5102FE56.40806@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <74D8E686-3679-46F2-8A08-4CF5DFC020CA@FreeBSD.org> <20130125113122.GN2522@kib.kiev.ua> <E0EA1F1F-99BB-47F5-94A3-1C197F680BD9@bsdimp.com> <20130125195941.GW2522@kib.kiev.ua> <5102ECBF.4060500@FreeBSD.org> <20130125204430.GX2522@kib.kiev.ua> <5102F107.8090501@FreeBSD.org> <5102FE56.40806@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/25/2013 16:51, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2013-01-25 21:54, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> ...
>> I am aware a fix is being worked on. I think that as long as
>> the default compiler/C++ library works it is OK to make things
>> easier for other compilers. I am OK with having that change in
>> -current but for 9.x it is simply unacceptable.
>
> Actually, clang with libc++ works fine, and both clang and gcc with
> libstdc++ don't...
>
> If the problem is caused by the switchable libsupc++.so backend lib, I
> would have no trouble with reverting that.  But do we know that for sure
> at this point?  I have not spent enough time looking deeply into the
> issue.
>

Yes, pretty sure that reverting that commit fixes kern/171610.

OTOH, theraven@ is really working on it and is near to a solution. The
damage in 9.1 release was already done so perhaps we can wait a bit
more for a complete fix.

Pedro.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51033982.4020301>