On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:21:56PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > 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.
>From what I see there is currently just over 1K ports failing, and not all off them are due to Clang. This number is perfectly manageable to solve within several months timeframe. Quite a fraction of those Clang-failing ports (judging from the commit logs) are solvable by passing -Wno-foobar to CFLAGS. So I think a real fix is needed for a few hundreds of ports. > 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. Ports should build with any compiler, ideally. Those ports who fail should be fixed, or marked as GCC-only as a last resort. ./danfe _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
