I see value in adding a new name. I see no value in a non-backwards compatible change to delete/rename a fully supported one.
Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: Rebecca Cran <rebe...@bsdio.com> > Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2023 10:49 AM > To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; > Leif Lindholm <quic_llind...@quicinc.com>; > pedro.falc...@gmail.com > Cc: Gao, Liming <gaolim...@byosoft.com.cn>; Oliver Smith-Denny > <o...@smith-denny.com>; Jiang, Guomin > <guomin.ji...@intel.com>; Lu, Xiaoyu1 <xiaoyu1...@intel.com>; Wang, Jian J > <jian.j.w...@intel.com>; Yao, Jiewen > <jiewen....@intel.com>; Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+tianoc...@kernel.org>; Justen, > Jordan L <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com>; Gerd > Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>; Feng, Bob C <bob.c.f...@intel.com>; Andrew Fish > <af...@apple.com> > Subject: Re: 回复: 回复: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 00/13] > BaseTools,CryptoPkg,MdePkg,OvmfPkg: Delete > CLANG35,CLANG38,GCC48,GCC49, rename GCC5 to GCC, update CLANGDWARF, delete VS > 2008-2013, EBC > > I've already added changes to the patch series to fix EDK2 CI to use the > new name. Fortunately there aren't many places that need updated. > > Downstream scripts should be trivial to change: just do a find/replace > for GCC5. > > > -- > Rebecca Cran > > > On 4/4/23 11:45 AM, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > > Changing the toolchain tag name from GCC5 to GCC will break > > EDK II CI and likely 100's of downstream developer/CI scripts. > > > > Can we keep GCC5 and add GCC that is identical to GCC5? > > > > Mike > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Rebecca Cran > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2023 10:01 AM > >> To: Leif Lindholm <quic_llind...@quicinc.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; > >> pedro.falc...@gmail.com > >> Cc: Gao, Liming <gaolim...@byosoft.com.cn>; Oliver Smith-Denny > >> <o...@smith-denny.com>; Jiang, Guomin > >> <guomin.ji...@intel.com>; Lu, Xiaoyu1 <xiaoyu1...@intel.com>; Wang, Jian J > >> <jian.j.w...@intel.com>; Yao, Jiewen > >> <jiewen....@intel.com>; Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+tianoc...@kernel.org>; > >> Justen, Jordan L <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com>; Gerd > >> Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>; Feng, Bob C <bob.c.f...@intel.com>; Andrew > >> Fish <af...@apple.com>; Kinney, Michael D > >> <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > >> Subject: Re: 回复: 回复: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 00/13] > >> BaseTools,CryptoPkg,MdePkg,OvmfPkg: Delete > >> CLANG35,CLANG38,GCC48,GCC49, rename GCC5 to GCC, update CLANGDWARF, delete > >> VS 2008-2013, EBC > >> > >> > >> On 4/4/23 10:32 AM, Leif Lindholm wrote: > >>> On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 16:57:18 +0100, Pedro Falcato wrote: > >>>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 4:49 PM Rebecca Cran <rebe...@bsdio.com> wrote: > >>>>> Okay. I'll rework the patch series to only delete GCC48 and keep GCC49 > >>>>> and GCC5. > >>>> Please rename them? There's no point in keeping their current names > >>>> anyway. I guarantee you that most people are not really able to guess > >>>> GCC49 to be the "non-LTO" flavor. > >>>> > >>>> And IMO Ard has already proved the value in non-LTO builds anyway, so > >>>> yeah. GCC and GCCNOLTO please. > >>> Agreed. I don't think there are any outstanding items that need > >>> resolving. > >>> > >>> I'd be very happy to stop hearing "you need GCC 5 in order to build > >>> edk2" misunderstandings. > >> Thanks! As a new co-maintainer I was trying to be diplomatic, but I > >> really don't see any reason to keep the existing names. > >> > >> I'll send out a v3 patch series with all the fixes I and others have > >> identified. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Rebecca Cran > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#102514): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/102514 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/98051589/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
