From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 1 05:44:14 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63A32106564A; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 05:44:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090F78FC1E; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 05:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.3/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o515XauE019629; Mon, 31 May 2010 23:33:36 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 23:33:45 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20100531.233345.858217842222352436.imp@bsdimp.com> To: yanefbsd@gmail.com From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: References: <20100531161713.GA60782@freebsd.org> <20100531.123318.1097297678389159803.imp@bsdimp.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.3 on Emacs 22.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: rdivacky@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Importing clang/LLVM into FreeBSD HEAD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 05:44:14 -0000 In message: Garrett Cooper writes: : On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:33 AM, M. Warner Losh wro= te: : > In message: <20100531161713.GA60782@freebsd.org> : = : [...] : = : > There's more context here too. =A0To improve the support of various= : > architectures, we're planning on doing two things. =A0First, we're : > updating binutils to the latest gplv2 version. =A0This will solve m= any : > problems. =A0There's some other plans in this area as well, but the= : > summary is basically integrating some important vendor patches. : > Second, we're planning to have the ability to use an external, perh= aps : > vendor supplied, tool chain. =A0You can kludge this together today,= but : > it is tedious and difficult. : = : This in and of itself is an interesting prospect. Why would happen if= : one could drop in icc for instance :) (I realize that it's basically : gcc-compatible, but can this be done today without a lot of rework an= d : effort)? This is more about dropping in different assemblers, linkers, etc, than picking icc. CC=3Dxxx is relatively easy. It gets harder if you don't want to use the in-tree toolchain. Especially when cross building... Warner