Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:57:52 -0700 From: Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> To: Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Matthew Fleming <mdf@FreeBSD.org>, Brooks Davis <brooks@FreeBSD.org>, Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Building with gcc? Message-ID: <1385391472.1220.1.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> In-Reply-To: <20131125133654.GE2310@glenbarber.us> References: <CAMBSHm-k%2B6md05aEJXLnGbbyg-WScseqLfjrpRutC4TFk7ir5Q@mail.gmail.com> <20131125013122.GE1627@glenbarber.us> <65EE6ADD-78CB-4990-ABED-CCFCC4446C34@FreeBSD.org> <20131125133654.GE2310@glenbarber.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 08:36 -0500, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 01:59:03PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > > On 25 Nov 2013, at 02:31, Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 05:28:05PM -0800, Matthew Fleming wrote: > > >> I'm trying to test a change to gcc, and I'd like to do a full > > >> buildworld/buildkernel using the gcc compiler. So I added this to my > > >> /etc/src.conf (and make.conf, since I can't remember under which scenarios > > >> they're different): > > >> > > >> WITHOUT_CLANG=YES > > >> WITH_GCC=YES > > >> WITH_GNUCXX=YES > > >> > > >> and I started a buildworld. It's currently building clang. > > >> > > >> Why is it building clang? > > >> > > > > > > You also want WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC=YES. I have no reasonable explanation > > > for why it is different. > > > > WITHOUT_CLANG and WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC were decoupled in r256915 by brooks: > > > > "Stop conflating WITHOUT_CLANG with WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC. This allows > > bootstrapping a copy of clang without building clang for the base system > > which is useful for nanobsd and similar setups. It's still probably > > wrong to conflate what is installed as /usr/bin/cc with the selection > > of a bootstrap compiler under WITH*_CLANG_IS_CC, but that's for another > > day." > > > > I would still say that WITHOUT_CLANG implies that you cannot have clang > > as cc, so maybe it would be better to error out in this case? > > > > Yes, that is what I meant by not having a reasonable explanation why. > If WITHOUT_CLANG is set, WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC should (as it was before) > be implied. > > Glen > In a cross-build situation, you should be able to specify WITH_CLANG_IS_CC and WITHOUT_CLANG and you get a system that is cross-compiled for the target by clang, but clang itself is not cross-compiled and installed onto the target. (I'm not sure that actually works yet, but I think that's the intention.) The names involved are confusing, but the concept makes sense. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1385391472.1220.1.camel>