On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 02:50:03PM +0800, Martin Wilke wrote: > > Dear All, > > As we all know FreeBSD 10 brings a new compiler along, and for that we need > to get ports on the right > track. I have done several exp-runs on the current src and we still have a > lot of fallouts. We > would like to ask you to have a look [1] at the failed ports and help to fix > them. We will start this week > an i386 exp-run to see how the status is. > > Thanks for your time. > > - Martin on behalf of portmgr > > [1]http://pointyhat-west.isc.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-10-exp-latest/
Didn't a sort of consensus when switching to clang for base was discussed, was that ports would start use a port-provided version of gcc ? The adoption of the ports gcc was stalled due to the unability to make exp-runs, AFAIK. What you are proposing is de-facto forking the whole open-source code base. This cannot work, and in fact steals the FreeBSD resources for something which has absolutely no relevance for FreeBSD project. Ports should not be forced to use clang, either a ports gcc work should be finished, or cc in HEAD switched back to gcc. This is de-facto blocker for the 10.0.
pgpTFwZ8p9HUp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
