From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 12 09:15:21 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: toolchain@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF776106564A; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:15:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (pancho.soaustin.net [76.74.250.40]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B58078FC15; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:15:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id DC0E15623C; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 04:15:20 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 04:15:20 -0500 From: Mark Linimon To: Lars Engels Message-ID: <20120912091520.GB22971@lonesome.com> References: <20120910211207.GC64920@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <504ED1FC.3090608@FreeBSD.org> <20120911092750.GF20762@e-new.0x20.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120911092750.GF20762@e-new.0x20.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: toolchain@FreeBSD.org, Doug Barton , current@FreeBSD.org, Brooks Davis , freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:15:22 -0000 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:50AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote: > At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports > build with CLANG or not because they're not forced to. I think this is a mis-representation. Adding the requirement "your ports must work on clang" is adding an ex-post-facto requirement. This creates the following matrix of what we are implicitly asking maintainers to do: (FreeBSD 7|8|9|10) * (amd64|arm|i386|powerpc|sparc64) * (base gcc|base clang) It is completely insane to expect anyone to be able to test in all of those environments, or even a tiny subset of them. This isn't what most people sign up for when they sign up to maintain ports. > Those who don't run CURRENT won't notice, but those who do will have to > get their butts up and fix the ports I think it's foolish to assume that maintainres don't have their butts in gear as it is. Please note, we have nearly 1300 PRs, hundreds of ports with build errors and/or PRs, and hundreds that fail on -current only. I try to advertise all these things the best I know how. Adding the hundreds that fail on -clang only and then blaming the maintainers is simply going to be counter-productive. mcl