Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:03:09 -1100 From: Jan Beich <jbeich@tormail.org> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: toolchain@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th Message-ID: <1TC0ey-0009o8-NU@internal.tormail.org> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> 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=4.2 until they can actually build with clang?
>
> 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? :)
>
> What we need to do is what I and others have been asking to do for
> years. We need to designate a modern version of gcc (no less than 4.6)
> as the official default ports compiler, and rework whatever is needed to
> support this. Fortunately, that goal is much more easily achieved than
> fixing ports to build and run with clang. (It's harder than it sounds
> because there are certain key libs that define some paths depending on
> what compiler they were built with, but still easier than dealing with
> clang in the short term.)
To that effect ports also need to respect CC/CXX. There were a few -exp
runs without /usr/bin/{cc,gcc,etc} to find out non-conforming ones as
part of ports/159117. However, the issue was quickly shoved under the
carpet in order to focus on the more important, clang as default.
# last try, assumes_gcc are ports ignoring CC/CXX, many are fixed
http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-errorlogs/e.9-exp.20110723205754/index-reason.html
>
> Once that is done, the compiler in the base is an afterthought, and we
> can do away with gcc in the base altogether much more easily. Users who
> want to help support building ports with clang can continue to do so.
>
> Doug
--
Ignoring for the moment clang -exp runs are *still* done with clang 3.0
while we're discussing here clang 3.2 becoming default.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1TC0ey-0009o8-NU>