From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 19 09:09:02 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E18CA1065675 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 09:09:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mueller23@insightbb.com) Received: from mail.insightbb.com (smtp.insight.synacor.com [208.47.185.22]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9669C8FC12 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 09:09:02 +0000 (UTC) X_CMAE_Category: 0,0 Undefined,Undefined X-CNFS-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=FHLvU3UV72LE1j7dEqtJhruKUqqkeWzFW2B9leN3Oic= c=1 sm=0 a=jLN7EqiLvroA:10 a=KdgEURlQC0B8lIxJ8-kA:9 a=Q/oqmR4JO1zR3vNQamCQeQ==:117 X-CM-Score: 0 X-Scanned-by: Cloudmark Authority Engine Authentication-Results: smtp01.insight.synacor.com header.from=mueller230@insightbb.com; sender-id=softfail Authentication-Results: smtp01.insight.synacor.com smtp.mail=mueller23@insightbb.com; spf=softfail; sender-id=softfail Received-SPF: softfail (smtp01.insight.synacor.com: transitional domain insightbb.com does not designate 74.134.26.53 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.134.26.53] ([74.134.26.53:51781] helo=localhost) by mail.insightbb.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.40 r(29895/29896)) with ESMTP id 14/FA-06229-7A140EF4; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 05:08:56 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 05:08:55 -0400 Message-ID: <14.FA.06229.7A140EF4@smtp01.insight.synacor.com> From: "Thomas Mueller" To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: David Naylor , Volodymyr Kostyrko , Matthew Seaman Subject: Re: Why Clang? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 09:09:03 -0000 from David Naylor: > I am the one who sends these persistent messages. Some users of my packages > reported that wine didn't run due to a clang compiled world. I never verified > them (although I got multiple reports). With the updates to clang it may have > also been corrected. > I attributed the problem to clang miscompiling a library in base used by wine > and Volodymyr, I think, confirms this: I only have other people's experience on this issue, need to test this, but want to keep a GCC-compiled world for now, at least for a production system. This would not stop me from trying Clang on an experimental/testing installation, such as HEAD, where the basic intent is development. >From Volodymyr Kostyrko: > Thomas Mueller wrote: > >Now one concern is wine not working when Clang is used to "make buildworld". > For me I'm just waiting on toolchain stabilization as both this one and > (open|libre)office fail because of libgcc_s compiled with clang on amd64. I guess that's why I want to keep at least one GCC-compiled world for now. Like it or not, Linux is by far the leading open-source OS, and most of the ports are originally developed with mainly Linux in mind. Linux software development is GCC-centric, I don't know if there is any work with Clang in Linux. Now how will I know whether GCC or Clang is the default compiler for building the world and kernel, and for ports? Not that I want to avoid Clang, just don't want to be caught by surprise. Tom