From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 22 22:06:26 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C8981065673; Sun, 22 May 2011 22:06:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD97D8FC0A; Sun, 22 May 2011 22:06:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.0.0.63] (63.imp.bsdimp.com [10.0.0.63]) (authenticated bits=0) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p4MM1wAY094084 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 22 May 2011 16:01:58 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: <20110522213058.GB21144@lonesome.com> Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 16:01:58 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <22621AEF-6EF3-4E07-8CBD-57D5037A7DEA@bsdimp.com> References: <201105221632.p4MGWjUb081825@svn.freebsd.org> <20110522202256.GA43412@freebsd.org> <20110522213058.GB21144@lonesome.com> To: Mark Linimon X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (harmony.bsdimp.com [10.0.0.6]); Sun, 22 May 2011 16:01:58 -0600 (MDT) Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, Roman Divacky , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Dimitry Andric , svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r222183 - head/lib/clang X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 22:06:26 -0000 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