Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 16:01:58 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, Roman Divacky <rdivacky@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r222183 - head/lib/clang Message-ID: <22621AEF-6EF3-4E07-8CBD-57D5037A7DEA@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20110522213058.GB21144@lonesome.com> References: <201105221632.p4MGWjUb081825@svn.freebsd.org> <20110522202256.GA43412@freebsd.org> <20110522213058.GB21144@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On May 22, 2011, at 3:30 PM, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:22:56PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote: >> The problem here is deeper in my opinion. What FreeBSD calls >> amd64 the rest of the world (ie. linux) calls x86_64, I think >> that instead of this we should teach llvm/clang about "amd64". >> Maybe as a FreeBSD-only diff. >=20 > If we move away from "amd64", we are going to need a _substantial_ = amount > of work on ports. Yea. That's why I think, although I'd like to move away from it, we're = stuck with amd64 for both MACHINE and MACHINE_ARCH for quite some time. = In that case, we'll just have to configure clang the same way we = configure gcc with the x86_64 monicker. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?22621AEF-6EF3-4E07-8CBD-57D5037A7DEA>