Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:22:33 -0600 From: Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> To: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD stable <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org>, Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: merged llvm/clang 3.4 Message-ID: <1396045353.81853.167.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> In-Reply-To: <69411D70-0866-4AA4-9EB5-4C0FC8D89FD0@FreeBSD.org> References: <20140328165121.13797.qmail@mailgate.gta.com> <6F2AEDEC-4173-45B0-9C21-1D80E33660F6@FreeBSD.org> <1396029772.81853.150.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <B373566C-03DB-4508-9088-4E343A2638F5@FreeBSD.org> <CAG=rPVcM6KOAd2y8zyYP6GJmQ3EkVu%2Bm-r1OcPmS0TUQGKy=AA@mail.gmail.com> <5335E715.3090603@FreeBSD.org> <AE8439D0-637D-45DA-8DD1-37888266FD44@FreeBSD.org> <1396043733.81853.164.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <69411D70-0866-4AA4-9EB5-4C0FC8D89FD0@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 23:19 +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 28 Mar 2014, at 22:55, Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 22:35 +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > ... > >> I'm now testing something similar, which also tests the FreeBSD version, > >> so it can be applied to head and then MFC'd. I will commit it soon. > >> > >> -Dimitry > >> > > > > Why test the version? The tools on head can't handle dwarf4 any better > > than the tools on the stable branches. I don't understand the sudden > > change in mindset that after 20 years of freebsd providing a completely > > usable development environment in base, now all of a sudden it's okay to > > not do that anymore. > > The change in mindset is simply to modernize, e.g. move away from > ancient tools and formats. Otherwise we will be stuck in the pre-GPLv3 > era forever. > > Also, "The tools" is really only our ancient version of gdb, and that > should be removed from base as soon as lldb is usable. The rest of base > (really only the CTF tools) can handle dwarf4, now a more recent version > of libdwarf is available. > > > > It seems fine to me to say "If you want better tools, use the latest > > ports" but not fine to say "If you want any tools at all, use the latest > > ports (oh and by the way, good luck with cross-building if you're not an > > amd64 person)." > > Strange, I thought the general opinion was to actually remove as much > stuff from base as possible. With the toolchain being the most logical > one to move out? But maybe I didn't get the memo... :-) > Well, there is certainly a growing religion organizing around that dogma. I am not an adherent to such thinking. I have nothing against supporting an external toolchain, and I'm dead set against requiring it. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1396045353.81853.167.camel>