From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 19 07:01:39 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071221065675; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 07:01:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from mail.ebusiness-leidinger.de (mail.ebusiness-leidinger.de [217.11.53.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 807D48FC1A; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 07:01:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (p57B3B444.dip.t-dialin.net [87.179.180.68]) by mail.ebusiness-leidinger.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D48F844010; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:01:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D8D7121D; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:01:29 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=Leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1282201289; bh=bTfdyjSJASlRVuoCiqXwl6+tv7TATDAJKCG92SC/tDg=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=tpo0/9BltALan4JAn8BKXEgEkpSrM2103t5PHypsqy7GeB0oJ7E3pW72/KLVSzCP0 leVwb6OjqsSEvlkO/VxJFEjQFBqBMqx76qcZOu5JNfkwxAilexXJbRs4hRv8GwNlgJ ugiOPQZ5ipuyOdCU3Jmvj8PFanHcZkxJntfYzNabXd+HYb8phRqs70CkkKSrPomiEv Lxnt350CLxu52vTzseAH1PLHThaRSswNT85JPl5MDo1bncZIosdYLY7Ic5TTroRO+I NeNgxlJMI2+t7gKNlTEXCHnvpLLQlRAClSnoB1Q+nQTgc+ocDkj3bmXKppAYUxw0uz Fuy5mKP+coXnQ== Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.14.4/8.13.8/Submit) id o7J71TtV063469; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:01:29 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.ec.europa.eu (pslux.ec.europa.eu [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:01:28 +0200 Message-ID: <20100819090128.22597bbvyogdw9wk@webmail.leidinger.net> Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:01:28 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Gabor Kovesdan References: <65F17C45-55C1-4349-A4D1-A3D6AD0D9A80@FreeBSD.org> <4C6C1EB1.5000004@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4C6C1EB1.5000004@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Dynamic Internet Messaging Program (DIMP) H3 (1.1.4) X-EBL-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-EBL-MailScanner-ID: 9D48F844010.A3BB8 X-EBL-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-EBL-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, spamhaus-ZEN, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-1.1, required 6, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.10, DKIM_VALID -0.10, DKIM_VALID_AU -0.10) X-EBL-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-EBL-MailScanner-Watermark: 1282806096.07128@jHNj0DEEXL94bT1D83Y40g X-EBL-Spam-Status: No Cc: "arch@freebsd.org" , Rui Paulo , "current@freebsd.org" , Garrett Cooper Subject: Re: Removal of ICC (intel compiler) bits from mk 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: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 07:01:39 -0000 Quoting Gabor Kovesdan (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 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