From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Aug 26 01:12:33 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90FFA6A8;
 Mon, 26 Aug 2013 01:12:33 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com)
Received: from ainaz.pair.com (ainaz.pair.com [209.68.2.66])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FF82DCE;
 Mon, 26 Aug 2013 01:12:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from trevally.dhcp.nue.suse.com (charybdis-ext.suse.de
 [195.135.221.2])
 by ainaz.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DF6BB3F419;
 Sun, 25 Aug 2013 21:12:31 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 03:12:30 +0200 (CEST)
From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
Subject: Re: patch to add AES intrinsics to gcc
In-Reply-To: <CE2DCF04-3E81-4FFB-AEB4-CD788420D84E@bsdimp.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1308260306080.3920@trevally.site>
References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com>
 <105E26EE-8471-49D3-AB57-FBE2779CF8D0@FreeBSD.org>
 <CAE-m3X324rbdP_C=az4eO-EkMcR-yFAeRG7S4q+MUsnMezGddw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5CE4B5FA-9DA0-45E4-8D67-161E0829FE6B@FreeBSD.org>
 <5217DBAB.5030607@freebsd.org>
 <86032E72-A569-4946-B4F8-26F687067B31@bsdimp.com>
 <1380949A-254A-4222-BEDE-0C23E16E4F67@freebsd.org>
 <8C31A000-6806-4291-98A4-E8291E637BD2@bsdimp.com>
 <CAJ-Vmo=p+81StQoHAKV-xHueNc7oRzsmm4a-5FuvK2qHX+WKXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOFF+Z1bAr4M5BM2=QKGz0D-3OHhHoTCUv8qRmxnsvz2gd64-Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CE2DCF04-3E81-4FFB-AEB4-CD788420D84E@bsdimp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 02:40:14 +0000
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, re@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org,
 John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com>, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>,
 toolchain@freebsd.org, "Sam Fourman Jr." <sfourman@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 01:12:33 -0000

On Sat, 24 Aug 2013, Warner Losh wrote:
>> "If you push gcc out to a port, and you have the 'external compiler' 
>> toolchain support working correctly enough to build with this, why 
>> don't we just push clang out to a port, and be done with it?"
> This is a stupid idea. It kills the tightly integrated nature of 
> FreeBSD. I'd say it is far too radical a departure and opens up a 
> huge can of "which version of what compiler" nightmare that we've 
> largely dodged to date because we had one (or maybe two) compilers 
> in the base system.

I am working towards establishing lang/gcc as _the_ version of GCC
to use for ports.

Today I looked at a couple of those GCC cross-compilers we have in 
ports, and I have to admit I am not thrilled.  Each of those I saw
copies a lot from (older version of my ports), each has a different
maintainer, each has some additions, and there is little consistency.

Are these the base of 'external compiler' toolchain support?  Are
there any plans to increase consistency and reduce redundancy?  In
an ideal world, could those become slave ports of lang/gcc?

Gerald