Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:59:20 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk> Subject: Re: compiler info in kernel identification string Message-ID: <50A61C88.9040203@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <E1TZJYo-0009eF-CR@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> References: <20121113234303.GA15319@dft-labs.eu> <50A3639C.9050200@FreeBSD.org> <1352907497.1217.147.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <50A57623.4020108@FreeBSD.org> <50A5EC7C.5050303@FreeBSD.org> <5B4DE1FD-5DD3-49A5-B8DB-6D4C03ABD742@cederstrand.dk> <50A606E7.5000302@FreeBSD.org> <E1TZIix-0008lm-Al@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <50A612F9.30509@FreeBSD.org> <E1TZJYo-0009eF-CR@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 16/11/2012 12:54 Daniel Braniss said the following: >> >> This is starting to turn into a bikeshed, but anyway... >> >> on 16/11/2012 12:00 Daniel Braniss said the following: >>> the question as to what compiler was used to compile the kernel is a bit of an >>> oxymoron, since the kernel is made up of many different modules, which get >>> compiled >>> either by different compilers, or different compiler flags. >> >> The canonical way to compile a kernel is to use buildkernel and compile modules > > this does not guarantee uniformity, just look at the output it produces and > you will see > different compilers/assemblers/scripts/flags Different flags specified in the build infrastructure are OK. >> along with the kernel. Other configurations are supported too, of course. >> > >>> since the compiler does 'sign' the modules it compiles (and clang will/should >>> do it soon: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=7292) some tool like >>> file(1) could be modified to provide it, or config -x (8) ... >> >> The key word in your note about clang is 'soon' as in 'not yet'. > Dimitry wrote that he will handle it :-) Right. 'will' is not 'did'. >> >> Besides, when I see a bug report with a dmesg *I* want to immediately know what >> compiler was used there. > today it's clang vs. gcc -- transition time --, but again it's only part of > the story, > and soon it will only be noise. Different kernel toolchains are here to stay. And it's not just clang vs gcc, but also different toolchains for embedded world, etc. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50A61C88.9040203>