From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 16 09:39:40 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EE82106566B for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:39:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mexas@bristol.ac.uk) Received: from dirj.bris.ac.uk (dirj.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.78]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AF668FC08 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:39:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ncsc.bris.ac.uk ([137.222.10.41]) by dirj.bris.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PznCc-0000dz-Me; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:39:38 +0000 Received: from mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk ([137.222.187.241]) by ncsc.bris.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PznCc-0003Yc-GY; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:39:38 +0000 Received: from mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p2G9dcIC013021; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:39:38 GMT (envelope-from mexas@bristol.ac.uk) Received: (from mexas@localhost) by mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p2G9dcQY013020; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:39:38 GMT (envelope-from mexas@bristol.ac.uk) X-Authentication-Warning: mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk: mexas set sender to mexas@bristol.ac.uk using -f Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:39:38 +0000 From: Anton Shterenlikht To: Erwin Lansing Message-ID: <20110316093938.GB12965@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> References: <4D7BED01.6000506@FreeBSD.org> <696141300213240@web70.yandex.ru> <20110316091948.GZ46044@droso.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110316091948.GZ46044@droso.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Doug Barton , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Konstantin Tokarev Subject: Re: Compiling ports in a post-9.0-RELEASE world X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:39:40 -0000 On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 10:19:48AM +0100, Erwin Lansing wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 09:20:40PM +0300, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > > > > > > 13.03.2011, 01:00, "Doug Barton" : > > > Howdy, > > > > > > As many of you are no doubt already aware, much work has been undertaken > > > to make clang the default compiler for the src tree starting with > > > 9.0-RELEASE. It is not 100% certain that this change will be made, but > > > it's looking more likely every day. > > > > > > This raises an interesting question for how to deal with compiling ports > > > after 9.0 is released. So far there are 2 main ideas for how to deal > > > with this: > > > > > > 1. Fix all ports to compile with both gcc 4.2 (for RELENG_[78]) and clang. > > > 2. Adopt an official "ports compiler," which would likely be one of the > > > gcc versions from the ports tree itself, and update all ports to work > > > with it. > > > > 3. Fix Clang to compile more ports > > > Note that these 3 are not mutually exclusive. The clang developers have > been very responsive on earlier bugs we found and they are usually fixed > quickly, so I'm sure that if real bugs in clang are found they will be > happy to hear about them. Fixing ports to work with both gcc and clang > should also be a good target to reach for, but given the amount of ports > this is unrealistic to be finished before 9.0 is released. What will happen to ports in non-clang arches (sparc64, ia64) after 9.0R? -- Anton Shterenlikht Room 2.6, Queen's Building Mech Eng Dept Bristol University University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944 Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423