Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 23:48:07 -0400 From: Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: mdf@freebsd.org, "Robert N. M. Watson" <rwatson@freebsd.org>, Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Include file search path Message-ID: <BANLkTikec9iYVtLMnJ2ovZvENhrFmt_V-g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5AF348C8-6AB6-490D-A12E-89A51528F58F@bsdimp.com> References: <AANLkTi=BiUVnzsGg83wwWPHjnTDR=XukhJ3UK6Bd5hvF@mail.gmail.com> <4D934AF4.9080503@FreeBSD.org> <BB9CDEF6-5B59-47F3-8873-78D71E39BF3E@bsdimp.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1104021925110.67810@fledge.watson.org> <742085CD-7F6F-4879-9FFD-517EC3203D52@bsdimp.com> <F5CE9765-FFF0-439C-9156-51912EEE0C1C@freebsd.org> <5AF348C8-6AB6-490D-A12E-89A51528F58F@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Warner, On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > On Apr 2, 2011, at 1:10 PM, Robert N. M. Watson wrote: > >> On 2 Apr 2011, at 19:47, Warner Losh wrote: >> >>>> (2) Working clang/LLVM cross-compile of FreeBSD. This seems like a basic >>>> requirement to adopt clang/LLVM, and as far as I'm aware that's not yet a >>>> resolved issue? >>> >>> 0 work has been done here to my knowledge. The world view for clang and our in-tree gcc differ which makes it a challenge. >> >> That's disappointing. I seem to recall it's more an issue of our build integration with clang/LLVM than an underlying issue in clang/LLVM? > > Yes. The problem isn't hard, the cross compile paradigm is just a little different. > >>>> We (Cambridge) are currently bringing up FreeBSD on a new soft-core 64-bit MIPS platform. We're already using a non-base gcc for our boot loader work, and plan to move to using clang/LLVM later in the year. The base system seems a bit short on detail when it comes to the above, currently. >>> >>> Yes. I've had to add about a dozen changes so far to get close to building with xdev compilers. A similar number are needed to make it easy to configure and add systree support, I think. >> >> Sounds like great progress -- do you think we'll ship 9.0 in a "just works" state with regard to this? > > I sure hope so. I'd like to have demoable stuff by BSDcan. > BSDCan has passed, has there been any advance made since that discussion ? Thanks, - Arnaud
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTikec9iYVtLMnJ2ovZvENhrFmt_V-g>