Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:55:22 -0500
From:      Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
To:        Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: System headers with clang?
Message-ID:  <589d032a-7b71-4ff1-8adf-f5e49e87696c@email.android.com>
In-Reply-To: <83FC19FA-BD52-4383-9ABE-708161597B85@mac.com>
References:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110091229550.43656@lrosenman.dyndns.org> <4E942FF1.9000805@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110110830200.21480@lrosenman.dyndns.org> <4E9449F2.2000801@FreeBSD.org> <4E944BA5.4080506@lerctr.org> <83FC19FA-BD52-4383-9ABE-708161597B85@mac.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I didn't say bug for bug, just not generate stupid errors like the ffs one.=

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

C=
huck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> wrote:

On Oct 11, 2011, at 6:59 AM, Larry Ro=
senman wrote:
> We will NOT support clang as the compiler for lsof unless t=
he system headers work the same way as gcc's do.

That apparently means you=
 won't support clang then, because it's not intended to be (or ever going t=
o be) fully bug-for-bug "compatible" with GCC. In this case, at least, clan=
g is reporting legitimate issues which should be fixed, even if folks conti=
nue to build lsof with GCC from now until the end of days.

To echo a word =
someone else just used, I'm baffled as to why you would hold such a positio=
n.

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?589d032a-7b71-4ff1-8adf-f5e49e87696c>