Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:01:28 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "arch@freebsd.org" <arch@FreeBSD.org>, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@FreeBSD.org>, "current@freebsd.org" <current@FreeBSD.org>, Garrett Cooper <gcooper@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Removal of ICC (intel compiler) bits from mk Message-ID: <20100819090128.22597bbvyogdw9wk@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <4C6C1EB1.5000004@FreeBSD.org> References: <E604222D-A731-4F0E-BF21-FF7F4306A899@gmail.com> <AANLkTimCdcBvgBt1sr2y1_=6fOEGWFFxa=hRwQ5vzyhT@mail.gmail.com> <65F17C45-55C1-4349-A4D1-A3D6AD0D9A80@FreeBSD.org> <4C6C1EB1.5000004@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org> (from Wed, 18 Aug 2010 19:56:01 +0200): > Em 2010.08.18. 19:37, Rui Paulo escreveu: >> On 18 Aug 2010, at 18:18, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Rui Paulo<rpaulo@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> I've been chatting with the ICC ex-users and they seem to be ok >>>> with the removal of the ICC bits from share/mk and other places. >>>> The reason is that it doesn't work and no one has volunteered to >>>> fix it for many years. This seems to indicate that the interest >>>> in ICC is low. >>>> If there's anyone against this, speak now or forever be silent. :-) >>> Later versions of icc are more gcc compliant aren't they? If so, >>> wouldn't this also be a non-issue to remove the bits, or are there >>> still some incompatibilities between gcc and icc that are worth >>> noting? >> I really don't know how compatible is the latest icc because no one >> ever updated the ports version. This is actually a hint that no one >> really uses this anymore. > IIRC, apart from the low interest, the problem was that because of > ICC's license using ICC to test this mk stuff requires a commercial > license because somehow it is considered a derivative work. It has If we wanted to ship binaries, we would have to compile them with the commercial license. > also prevented us from providing better support. In 2006, I wanted > to do some progress as part of my SoC project because that time > there was more interest. Alexander (CC'd) may comment on this. I > think he has a license for FreeBSD work but he is not allowed to > give it out to a third party. At some point I got a license (IIRC for 2-users) which could have been installed in the cluster, but this would have meant to install a license server somewhere. The license was also the only commercial license I had which would have allowed to run the amd64... ehrm... em64t version of icc. This was for icc 9.x and I have some doubts this license will work with icc 11.x. If someone would get icc 11.x up and runnig as a port (similar to what we have for outdated icc version in the ports collection), I would have a look if my contact at Intel is still working there in a position which allows him to get a commercial license for us. Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 The happiest time in any man's life is just after the first divorce. -- J. K. Galbraith
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100819090128.22597bbvyogdw9wk>