Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2014 12:28:14 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> To: Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org" <freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>, "conrad.meyer@emc.com" <conrad.meyer@emc.com> Subject: Re: Building clang in buildworld as part of the bootstrap process -- is it really necessary? Message-ID: <4AF47B56-109E-46A3-8EC4-75B95E063FCF@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <215CB3BB-BA4B-41D9-9CBF-FC0FDEE9492C@gmail.com> References: <CAGHfRMD0Tm14p%2Bv=%2B6mp89eb4TSNenPSPn92XKC2XbM8m6Ut=g@mail.gmail.com> <01C283B7-C9AF-4AE8-A192-FBC7C04D207E@bsdimp.com> <215CB3BB-BA4B-41D9-9CBF-FC0FDEE9492C@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6 Sep 2014, at 06:47, Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> wrote: > Makes sense. I'll do some poking around and see if things could = potentially be optimized with the clang build. On beefy machines it's = not a big deal, but as we know on machines without a ton of memory or = SSDs, it can become painful, as expected. The build system for clang-in-base has improved a bit so, as you say, it = is now reasonably fast on beefy machines (release clang build with the = upstream build system takes 2-3 minutes on a fast machine, about 10 on = my laptop, the one in buildworld isn't quite as good at extracting = parallelism). On slow machines, it can be quite painful. The correct solution to this problem is likely to be to start creating = bootstrap-toolchain packages. This is also likely to be necessary for = architectures like MIPS and PowerPC before 11 anyway, because the host = compiler doesn't have the C++11 support required for bootstrapping a = newer LLVM and clang. We can work around that quite easily if we have = package for the bootstrap toolchain (possibly cross-compiled from an x86 = machine). David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4AF47B56-109E-46A3-8EC4-75B95E063FCF>