From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 13 04:06:11 2012 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 A97E81065680; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 04:06:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@tormail.org) Received: from cpanel.centralhosts.net (cpanel.centralhosts.net [66.55.76.125]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC468FC17; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 04:06:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tor20.anonymizer.ccc.de ([31.172.30.3]:44187 helo=internal.tormail.org) by cpanel.centralhosts.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TC0f1-0004zi-NC; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 00:04:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tormail.org; s=tm; h=Message-Id:X-TorMail-User:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=ktm/Q3bdghuCfK2qPNSkIR+qksEg8GID3pqW7J3+raw=; b=hF7X8kvg+M09WAsw3yOZXnrybreCgmWQQT1OPCV2kgqri+eV354RHJqvByxmaq7YXry/c+UKczMeFQbjXxkqL/XvQpB2UEqisVehnCFdqLSmUPafpD4fQeSf5jnOpCYMrULi2ayrRSRVNLUjxCSGDE40KYCSjncAuqE4gYNWPc8=; Received: from jbeich by internal.tormail.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1TC0ey-0009o8-NU; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 04:04:15 +0000 From: Jan Beich To: Doug Barton Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:03:09 -1100 References: <20120910211207.GC64920@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <20120911104518.GF37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20120911120649.GA52235@freebsd.org> <20120911122122.GJ37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20120911123833.GA54483@freebsd.org> <848C813E-E6EC-4FAF-9374-B5583A077404@cederstrand.dk> <505055F7.9020809@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TorMail-User: jbeich Message-Id: <1TC0ey-0009o8-NU@internal.tormail.org> X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cpanel.centralhosts.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tormail.org Cc: toolchain@freebsd.org, Roman Divacky , current@freebsd.org, Erik Cederstrand , freebsd-ports Subject: Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th 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: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 04:06:11 -0000 Doug Barton writes: > On 09/11/2012 02:52 AM, Erik Cederstrand wrote: >> So can we do a sweep on the ports tree and mark the 2232 ports with USE_GCC=4.2 until they can actually build with clang? > > Unfortunately it isn't that simple. We already have a statistically > significant number of ports that don't even compile with gcc 4.2.1. How > many compilers do we expect the users to install? :) > > What we need to do is what I and others have been asking to do for > years. We need to designate a modern version of gcc (no less than 4.6) > as the official default ports compiler, and rework whatever is needed to > support this. Fortunately, that goal is much more easily achieved than > fixing ports to build and run with clang. (It's harder than it sounds > because there are certain key libs that define some paths depending on > what compiler they were built with, but still easier than dealing with > clang in the short term.) To that effect ports also need to respect CC/CXX. There were a few -exp runs without /usr/bin/{cc,gcc,etc} to find out non-conforming ones as part of ports/159117. However, the issue was quickly shoved under the carpet in order to focus on the more important, clang as default. # last try, assumes_gcc are ports ignoring CC/CXX, many are fixed http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-errorlogs/e.9-exp.20110723205754/index-reason.html > > Once that is done, the compiler in the base is an afterthought, and we > can do away with gcc in the base altogether much more easily. Users who > want to help support building ports with clang can continue to do so. > > Doug -- Ignoring for the moment clang -exp runs are *still* done with clang 3.0 while we're discussing here clang 3.2 becoming default.