Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:51:18 +0100 From: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> To: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing default build of gcc Message-ID: <5102FE56.40806@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <5102F107.8090501@FreeBSD.org> References: <74D8E686-3679-46F2-8A08-4CF5DFC020CA@FreeBSD.org> <20130125113122.GN2522@kib.kiev.ua> <E0EA1F1F-99BB-47F5-94A3-1C197F680BD9@bsdimp.com> <20130125195941.GW2522@kib.kiev.ua> <5102ECBF.4060500@FreeBSD.org> <20130125204430.GX2522@kib.kiev.ua> <5102F107.8090501@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2013-01-25 21:54, Pedro Giffuni wrote: ... > I am aware a fix is being worked on. I think that as long as > the default compiler/C++ library works it is OK to make things > easier for other compilers. I am OK with having that change in > -current but for 9.x it is simply unacceptable. Actually, clang with libc++ works fine, and both clang and gcc with libstdc++ don't... If the problem is caused by the switchable libsupc++.so backend lib, I would have no trouble with reverting that. But do we know that for sure at this point? I have not spent enough time looking deeply into the issue. I did notice that libsupc++ .So objects get linked into libstdc++.so, even while they are also in libsupc++.so. Maybe that is causing trouble?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5102FE56.40806>