From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 2 21:12:39 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E868F73; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 21:12:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.95.76.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "troutmask.apl.washington.edu", Issuer "troutmask.apl.washington.edu" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A836BCEF; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 21:12:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s32LCdmD038210 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 2 Apr 2014 14:12:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.8/8.14.8/Submit) id s32LCcr3038209; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 14:12:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 14:12:38 -0700 From: Steve Kargl To: David Chisnall Subject: Re: gcc compilation broken with SVN r264042 Message-ID: <20140402211238.GA38058@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <533C61B8.7060809@protected-networks.net> <509CAA08-8F00-4ED8-81FF-A51F1ECDC15C@FreeBSD.org> <533C6ABE.2000801@protected-networks.net> <307BA2CF-E02A-4D82-B9E5-23AECAEA89DC@FreeBSD.org> <20140402202158.GA37846@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <8ED6200B-CBED-4B2A-8E9A-EB671B30F156@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8ED6200B-CBED-4B2A-8E9A-EB671B30F156@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: Michael Butler , FreeBSD Current X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 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: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 21:12:40 -0000 On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 09:46:19PM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > On 2 Apr 2014, at 21:21, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > Who is "we" in "even if we don't encourage it..."? > > "We" is the FreeBSD project, collectively. For a larger list of > things that "we" recommend, There is a significant difference between "we recommend" and "we don't encourage". > > In fact, this is a fairly dumb idea, > > Having a recommended compiler is a dumb idea? > Having a recommended compiler is fine. Actively discouraging the use of other compilers is a dumb idea. > > and *we* should encourage building > > the base system with as many different compilers as possible. > > I didn't say otherwise, Ah, yes you did. Here's the complete quote (with context): butler> I guess it's time for me to migrate that box to clang :-) you> Well, I wouldn't object to that, but it would be good to fix this - we still want to be able to build the base system with gcc (or another compiler), even if we don't encourage it... You are actively discouraging the use of "gcc (or another compiler)". How else is one to interpret the last 5 word + 1 contraction in your above quote? > If you're developing FreeBSD or testing, then please compile with > as many other compilers as you have and contribute patches I do development on libm (as you know!). I test with clang and base system gcc on i386, amd64, and sparc64. In the past, I also used pcc and newer versions of gcc to do some libm testing. > (or even just detailed reports) if they find bugs in the code. I do report problems with the compilers, but they are typically ignored. http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain/2014-March/001147.html You can also read some follow-up analysis here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-numerics/2014-March/000549.html -- Steve