From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 10 09:56:46 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81DA716A4BF for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:56:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.208.78.105]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF3143FBD for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:56:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) h8AGujuo003032; Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:56:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost)h8AGujYH003031; Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:56:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:56:45 -0700 From: Steve Kargl To: Michael Nottebrock Message-ID: <20030910165645.GA2839@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <3F5F2774.9010408@gmx.net> <20030910144620.GA2438@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <3F5F420B.5030202@gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F5F420B.5030202@gmx.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Quo vadis, -CURRENT? (recent changes to cc & compatibility) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:56:46 -0000 On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 05:23:55PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote: > Steve Kargl wrote: > > >I have no problems in building the traditional C "hello world" > >program with "cc -pedantic". > > You're right about that, you'll need a C++ hello world (, cout). > This is in the archives anyway and (should be) well known. Yes, it is a well known issue. The user is getting exactly what they wanted when she gave -pedantic to g++. > >>(why could > >>this change not have been made _after_ 4.9 is out the door, btw.? Or > >>before 5.0-R FWIW.) > > > > > >4.9 and 5.0-R are independent branch. By your logic we should wait to > >4.10 or 4.11 or 4.12 or ... before any substantial change can be made > >to -CURRENT. > > The point is that is isn't wise to commit a change like the -pthread > deprecation that breaks many ports just before a ports-freeze. Which threads library should -pthread link to your app (libc_r, libkse, or libthr) on a 5.x system? > > >The reason gcc-3.3.1 was committed before 5.0-R should > >be fairly obvious. > > I was concerned with the -pthread deprecation. Why? The portmgr can tag the ports collection at any point in time before or after the -pthread deprecation date. Additionally, your initial email started with your whining about -pedantic a and "Hello world" programs, which is completely orthogonal to -pthread. -- Steve