From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 4 12:26:41 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9193106564A; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 12:26:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78DDF8FC22; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 12:26:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (66.111.2.69.static.nyinternet.net [66.111.2.69]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0210146B81; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 08:26:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (smtp.hudson-trading.com [209.249.190.9]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 582A08A021; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 08:26:40 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 08:04:44 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (FreeBSD/7.3-CBSD-20100217; KDE/4.3.1; amd64; ; ) References: <20100529130240.GA99732@freebsd.org> <20100531132205.00000dd6@unknown> <20100604005236.GF22064@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <20100604005236.GF22064@lonesome.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201006040804.44861.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 04 Jun 2010 08:26:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.1 at bigwig.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=4.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on bigwig.baldwin.cx Cc: Bruce Cran , Mark Linimon , Astrodog , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [TESTING]: ClangBSD branch needs testing before the import to HEAD 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: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 12:26:41 -0000 On Thursday 03 June 2010 8:52:36 pm Mark Linimon wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 01:22:05PM +0100, Bruce Cran wrote: > > From previous messages I don't think sparc64 is currently supported by > > clang very well, if at all, so I think we'll still need gcc in the base > > system for some time. > > I'll put on my "tier-2 package builder hat" for a moment. > > IMHO it helps FreeBSD's robustness to have our other architectures. In > particular, fixing bugs in sparc64 may be helping us fix bugs that would > affect arm/mips/powerpc, which are key for our embedded userbase. > > Perhaps I'm just invested in this from having spent time on sparc64 ... > > But a counter-argument is that if the two archs that llvm currently does > not support well (sparc64 and ia64) start holding back major progress on > amd64/i386, then we should give the most weight to what 90%+ of our > userbase is on, and act accordingly. Hopefully that just means "keep > gcc as the default for our tier-2 archs." > > I've been finding it intellectually interesting to work on these, but > really, they shouldn't be allowed to hold up the parade. > > Final note: there is indeed active kernel work on sparc64, ia64, and > powerpc, so things are not stalled. I actually think that a realistic future may be that some archs use clang/llvm and some other archs still use gcc (probably with an option to use a gplv3 toolchain even, just not shipped by default perhaps). I even think it would be useful to have the option to use the latest gplv3 toolchain for amd64/i386 for folks who want to use it. -- John Baldwin