From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 11 14:28:40 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E8A2106564A; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:28:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=594a7e427=pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com) Received: from ip-002.utdallas.edu (ip-002.utdallas.edu [129.110.20.108]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23B448FC16; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:28:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Group: None X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlEFAK1JT1CBbgogWWdsb2JhbABFq1iQEAEjEIJbAQEFOAIzDBALGC5DFAYBEhuHdadClD+LEIVGYAOIU6Ar X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,405,1344229200"; d="scan'208";a="98709269" Received: from zxtm01.utdallas.edu (HELO [129.110.200.11]) ([129.110.10.32]) by ip-002.utdallas.edu with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 11 Sep 2012 09:27:27 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:27:25 -0500 From: Paul Schmehl To: Doug Barton , Lars Engels Message-ID: <899949C4294E09BFD34754CE@localhost> In-Reply-To: <504F07E3.4010004@FreeBSD.org> References: <20120910211207.GC64920@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <504ED1FC.3090608@FreeBSD.org> <20120911092750.GF20762@e-new.0x20.net> <504F07E3.4010004@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a1 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; size=2164 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 16:32:16 +0000 Cc: toolchain@FreeBSD.org, Brooks Davis , current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Paul Schmehl List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:28:40 -0000 --On September 11, 2012 2:44:03 AM -0700 Doug Barton wrote: >> >> Doug, as you can already use CLANG instead of GCC now, you will be able >> to use GCC instead of CLANG after November 4th. > > There's lots of things I _can_ do, what we're discussing is what the > defaults should be. > >> At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports >> build with CLANG or not > > Do you follow ports development? At all? There have been extensive > efforts over the last several years to get more ports compiling with > clang. The problem is that things like the c89 issue don't percolate > down, and we don't have a concerted effort from all of the relevant > parties to improve the issue. > > Fixing the problem of getting the right eyeballs on the things that need > fixing won't be improved by switching the default before they are fixed. > In fact, it's likely to make the people who are src-centric now even > less likely to help because their work will be "done." > >> Those who don't run CURRENT won't notice, but those who do will have to >> get their butts up and fix the ports, so 10.0 can have 99% of all ports >> build with CLANG and even 8.x and 9.x can already profit from having the >> broken ports fixed now. > > Yeah, and I'm going to get a pony out of this deal, right? :) > > You completely misunderstand the nature of the problem, therefore your > proposed solution isn't going to solve it. > Perhaps a port maintainer's input would help? I'd never even heard of clang until recently. I'm not a programmer. If I can't get my ports to compile with clang without a knowledge of programming, I'll abandon them. I'm too old and too tired to try learning a brand new system. I doubt I'm alone. -- Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. ******************************************* "It is as useless to argue with those who have renounced the use of reason as to administer medication to the dead." Thomas Jefferson "There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them." George Orwell