From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 12 10:46:30 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 0D6D91065670; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 10:46:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik@cederstrand.dk) Received: from csmtp2.one.com (csmtp2.one.com [91.198.169.22]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB8158FC0A; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 10:46:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.18] (unknown [217.157.7.221]) by csmtp2.one.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 03533308240F; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 10:40:29 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.0 \(1486\)) From: Erik Cederstrand In-Reply-To: <505055F7.9020809@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:40:28 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20120910211207.GC64920@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <20120911104518.GF37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20120911120649.GA52235@freebsd.org> <20120911122122.GJ37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20120911123833.GA54483@freebsd.org> <848C813E-E6EC-4FAF-9374-B5583A077404@cederstrand.dk> <505055F7.9020809@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1486) Cc: toolchain@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports 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 10:46:30 -0000 Den 12/09/2012 kl. 11.29 skrev Doug Barton : > On 09/11/2012 02:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote: >> So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports with = USE_GCC=3D4.2 until they can actually build with clang? >=20 > Unfortunately it isn't that simple. We already have a statistically > significant number of ports that don't even compile with gcc 4.2.1. = How > many compilers do we expect the users to install? :) If a port doesn't compile with the default compiler in base, I expect = that port to add a build dependency on the compiler that it actually = does compiles with. Of course, I hope to not have 6 different compilers = installed on my system, but the list of build or runtime dependencies = are at the discretion of the port (maintainer). As you (I think) said, = we can't force port maintainers to patch their ports to support clang. So even today, we have a significant number of ports that don't compile = with the default compiler (GCC 4.2.1). Aren't they broken already, in = the sense that they fail to tell me, the user, which compiler I should = use? Thanks, Erik=