From owner-freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Mon Jul 17 22:18:22 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5910BDA2981 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 22:18:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sid@bsdmail.com) Received: from mout.gmx.com (mout.gmx.com [74.208.4.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.gmx.com", Issuer "thawte SSL CA - G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2238774E6E for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 22:18:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sid@bsdmail.com) Received: from [108.70.50.7] by 3capp-mailcom-lxa06.server.lan (via HTTP); Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:18:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: From: Sid To: imp@bsdimp.com Cc: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Subject: re: suggestion for toolchain to have its own directories Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:18:13 +0200 Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:VeU3fEh4BxHViOnncE4rtD4H0J7nX+VxQ78Z8FLuOiv UkVebH5/uqxt8SH8MCGvCMhYn8hRfDdelDzOGhhuspdtRBJieX wWF4lBjCQWbNZgoSBjHsXsfjzRTF4FxXX8VMOGhiHFDaidAcdH lkLcJ/k1l99UoraxdnvdeGCVkOANNTF5Ez56eorjO53Dv6kXdy Hrrt55YgKUF2Sf9u4J06sJU7P2ES3SWRNla5VyiKDljopmOKGO wLtw8cM6tr+yfOQBsTLoFlmEOjH005IVangTjn9qLw8fx1DKeO UpLQbMVLa20VJW5iAp4pXEIhk3h X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:nWquq1KEwQg=:0RLfjxUr1AGv8uD7REkbwG 0bjTzcoaFlXpCARqZEw2Rki0bOMqObU3Z2P5ghBzcvF0AClbciwG6pY9AlNF2a+RJb60OXirR krAtgnitOofWd+/8lbD4AaFGqRVqyGhMOL5daShcchkqXXkGwpRVM8f4uBjfCDFvHir4NPrvi XQBCTVz7E7ftCqcPISIupIvDxyf6YhTN5cfd2aLhTKYxW954IcCRvGyd9hj3t/HZIpNE3Mu0a PvaejLL/Jkdj9s6z9c4I+3wLh6o634Xp81zzN8HEzcDAzt15nk1lVeE1paIYmiz3Kimb6teW6 Y7Vl+tm8PDIpBhzIbmVV2WoJEiS5+cOt2c1JtNgw1zfWLxfkBJKdlCKPiTVSAOyVlnLIy2D1O XmayXj6x7ygvGlnyphtsXwVYZxuW61KnPduDuPiJ22p0m9t3LKSaHNx25efO1u9hOKuBDdgBd WZi3e2Px+h15mjSA0wfiM8gDla95PfEk2PfqU6ZMn552vqtP+NoCvZ9AaioozwuI09/6bB5b2 ej3rrJfXWH68jhKmA3t2K5c6UnMVxnC5wbtVnBmhZuk X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 22:18:22 -0000 There's possibly a few good reasons. For instance, better organization means easier troubleshooting and finding bugs. It could mean easier maintenance and upgrading. It would also be easier to know for sure which file is being used: the one in the base system, or the one from ports, when it is assumed one or the other is used. A checksum can be run on the directory to find cases of corruption of compiling tools. src.conf can also be split up and simplified to another file that is only for compiling tools. They are looking at making much of the base system into packages, and the simplicity would reduce the need for it, or would simplify it. It would also make it easier for a meta-distribution from the install. Of course, a few of the above can be done without putting toolchains in their own modular directories. You are the professionals, who know what it would take, and how much trouble it would be versus any benefits. If it is worth it, perhaps the time isn't now. The time it would make sense to me, is to either replace or simplify the proposal of using packages as proponents for the base distribution. There would be no rush, but if the idea starts to make better sense or appeal to developers, then perhaps that idea can be thought about then. I still think it's a good idea, but I don't see a need to do anything at least in the near term. Thank you all for your responses. > On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 00:12:08 UTC 2017, Warner Losh wrote: >> On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 23:34:37 UTC 2017, Sid wrote: >> How about going with a toolchain directory for the base system only. It >> would use shared files, and have subdirectories specific to clang, gcc, or >> other compiling components or versions. This way it is both modular and >> organized. > And non-standard. Auxiliary tools that know about toolchains would need to > be modified. That's a losing fight. >> For instance: /usr/toolchain/bin/, /usr/toolchain/sbin/, and >> /usr/toolchain/lib/ can be used for shared files. /usr/toolchain/clang/, >> /usr/toolchain/gcc/, etc, and their (lib, sbin, bin, include) >> subdirectories can be used for specifically needed files. >> The old directories can be softlinked to there. > Old directories won't cut it. >> Any drastic changes can only be tried in the head branch. Port compilers >> should definitely be left alone, by not using /usr/local/toolchain/* at all. > Yea, I think this is a bad idea. There's no upside to it, other than > appealing to somebody's sense of what's organized. The downsides are plenty > and create a lot of work for us just to get back to where we are today. > Unless there's a truly compelling reason to do this, my vote, and loud > shouting voice, says don't do it.