From owner-cvs-all Mon Nov 18 6:15:13 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1982137B401; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 06:15:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from newtrinity.zeist.de (newtrinity.zeist.de [193.111.112.230]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 209E043E42; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 06:15:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marius@newtrinity.zeist.de) Received: from newtrinity.zeist.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by newtrinity.zeist.de (8.12.6/8.12.6/ZEIST.DE) with ESMTP id gAIEFAGF037852; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:15:10 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marius@newtrinity.zeist.de) Received: (from marius@localhost) by newtrinity.zeist.de (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id gAIEF5xR037851; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:15:05 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marius) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:15:05 +0100 From: marius@alchemy.franken.de To: Nakata Maho Cc: maho@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, alexander@leidinger.net Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang/ifc Makefile pkg-comment pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/lang/ifc/files assert_fail.c cpio-exclude cxa_atexit.c cxa_finalize.c errno_location.c ld.c linux_file.c mcount.S patch-aa patch-ifc stderr.c sysconf.c Message-ID: <20021118141505.GR89667@newtrinity.zeist.de> References: <200211180927.gAI9RWOa074354@repoman.freebsd.org> <20021118115407.GQ89667@newtrinity.zeist.de> <20021118.224523.640912260.maho@scarlatti.synchem.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021118.224523.640912260.maho@scarlatti.synchem.kyoto-u.ac.jp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:45:23PM +0900, Nakata Maho wrote: > > > the freebsd-ports of icc and ifc still cannot coexist as both ports patch > > the libraries in different ways but install them to the same location, > > i.e. overwrite each others' libraries. therefore please revert the backout > > of the check for icc in the ifc-port. > > I read through codes(but not deeply concerned), > and I think simply install icc over ifc is ok, but ifc over icc won't be good. well, i see it the other way round as ifc does more library-patching than icc, see private mail. > Well, extensive test should be done for both compiler... > > At least `ld' is the superset of icc version. > In some way they can be unified. as for icc the ld-wrapper will be replaced by a wrapper put in front of icc and icpc as it looks right now. that saves us from having some little "wrapper-functionality" in the icc and icpc scripts additionally to the ld-wrapper, i.e. one unified wrapper, and is cleaner in regards to what the wrapper does, how it works and the side effects it causes, e.g. right now an anti-footshooting device is missing that prevents calling the ld-wrapper instead of the real linker outside of using it for icc/icpc/ifc. marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message