Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 09:17:13AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > I'd disagree, particularly around build systems and the compiler components > within build systems. THere's always exceptions, but by in large I believe > upstreams are in the best position to select the compiler toolchains. Fedora routi

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Tue, 2020-06-09 at 08:57 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le lundi 08 juin 2020 à 09:48 -0600, Jeff Law a écrit : > > I put faith in both the upstreams and packagers to do the right thing > > for their project. Right now Fedora policy does exactly the opposite > > by forcing everyone to use GCC

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Le lundi 08 juin 2020 à 09:48 -0600, Jeff Law a écrit : > > I put faith in both the upstreams and packagers to do the right thing > for their project. Right now Fedora policy does exactly the opposite > by forcing everyone to use GCC rather than making an informed, per > project, decision. Look,

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Mon, 2020-06-08 at 12:21 -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote: > Igor Raits writes: > > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 23:11 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > On 04/06/20 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wi

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 06:19:40PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > The query above are bugs not related to c++20, and in some of them from the > comments it appears LLVM is not willing to fix but instead want to try to > change the psABI. The psABI authors stated that they don't intend to change > i

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Igor Raits writes: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 23:11 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >> On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >>> On 04/06/20 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: >>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy In some ways this means there is no "default

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 10:02:53AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 23:16 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 03:03:18PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > Clang/LLVM and GCC are ABI compatible (with the known exception of the > > > alignment > > > issue for atomics) an

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 23:16 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 03:03:18PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > Clang/LLVM and GCC are ABI compatible (with the known exception of the > > alignment > > issue for atomics) and one should be able to mix and match libraries > > compiled by > >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 21:49 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 01:36:37PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Igor Raits wrote: > > > ... > > > > > > Sadly some upstreams insist on clang just because they like it more, > > > without any technical reas

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 23:04 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:07 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 15:56 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > wrote: > > > One issue I am concerned about here is debuginfo quality. GCC produced > > > pret

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Mon, 08 Jun 2020 09:29:27 -0600 Jeff Law wrote: > On Sun, 2020-06-07 at 13:07 -0700, stan via devel wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:30:09 -0400 > > Ben Cotton wrote: > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > > > An obvious example is Firefox. Upstream, the Firefox

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Sun, 2020-06-07 at 13:07 -0700, stan via devel wrote: > On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:30:09 -0400 > Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > > An obvious example is Firefox. Upstream, the Firefox project builds > > primarily with Clang/LLVM. Yet we force the Fe

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05/06/20 23:11 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: "Upstream only builds+tests with Clang and using GCC requires lots of work from the Fedora maintainer to fix problems that upstream don't care about" is a good reason to use Clang. "I've heard the

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05/06/20 13:10 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 20:51 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Jeff Law: > As we both know, GCC has had ABI bugs as well. Both compilers strive > to be ABI compatible with each other and we should continue to work > together to find and address such issues.

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 16:30:09 -0400 Ben Cotton wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > An obvious example is Firefox. Upstream, the Firefox project builds > primarily with Clang/LLVM. Yet we force the Fedora package owner to > find and fix issues building with GCC then e

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Sat, 2020-06-06 at 07:58 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > The big problem then becomes getting packagers to address the > > diagnostics. I've > > been disappointed at how many packages are ignoring diagnostics > > (particularly > > those with security implications) and I'm actively looking at schemes

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 23:11 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On 04/06/20 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > > [snip] > > > == Documentatio

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 04/06/20 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > [snip] > > == Documentation == > > Several years ago Red Hat's tools team championed for Fedora policy to > > strongly > > discourage t

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 16:47 -0500, Steven Munroe wrote: > Jeff Law wrote: > > I'd respectfully disagree. There are certain features that GCC supports > > that Clang does not > > and vice-versa. But broadly they are comparable. What this means is some > > projects that are > > using bleeding edge

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Steven Munroe wrote: > And while you allow that some packages have good reasons to stick with > GCC. Several others on this list have demanded that clang/LLVM replace > GCC as the default compiler. Just to clear up any potential misunderstandings: I do NOT support replacing GCC with Clang/LLVM as

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > I don't think we should force Fedora Contributors (Packagers) to > change/fix their packages to compile with GCC if upstream decides, > supports and tests GCC. While that sentence parses, it fails the semantic analysis in my brain. ;-) I think that either the second "

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Jeff Law wrote: > I'd respectfully disagree. There are certain features that GCC supports that > Clang does not > and vice-versa. But broadly they are comparable. What this means is some > projects that are > using bleeding edge features may have a hard need for one toolchain or the > other. And

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 21:49 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 01:36:37PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Igor Raits wrote: > > > ... > > > > > > Sadly some upstreams insist on clang just because they like it more, > > > without any technical reas

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 09:59 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 05/06/20 10:23 +0200, Tomáš Popela wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:56 AM Kevin Kofler > > wrote: > > > > > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I > > > think that a distribution should be built w

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Friday, June 5, 2020 5:42:36 AM EDT Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 05. 06. 20 v 9:52 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > > > Ben Cotton wrote: > > > >> == Summary == > >> Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the > >> upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM. This

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 03:03:18PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > Clang/LLVM and GCC are ABI compatible (with the known exception of the > alignment > issue for atomics) and one should be able to mix and match libraries compiled > by > one with code compiled by the other just fine. They are known not

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020, 4:15 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:50 PM Simo Sorce wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 11:50 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:27 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > > > > wrote: >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Hi Jeff, On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:07 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 15:56 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org > wrote: > > One issue I am concerned about here is debuginfo quality. GCC produced > > pretty bad debuginfo with LTO in older versions. The EarlyDebug work > > d

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 15:04 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 11:19 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 09:52:09AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > I do not see why we should allow yet another special case for Firefox, > > > nor > > > why we should let random

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 19:31 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Ben Cotton: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > > > > == Summary == > > Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the > > upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM. This

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 21:51 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 13:36 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Igor Raits wrote: > > > ... > > > > > > Sadly some upstreams insist on clang just because they like it > > > more, > > > without any technical reason.

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 22:22 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 14:16 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 22:07 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > > > Just curious, how is it done in RHEL? Just some kind of CI that > > > analyses all builds or? > > So we have a step that sits betw

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 14:16 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 22:07 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > > > > Just curious, how is it done in RHEL? Just some kind of CI that > > analyses all builds or? > So we have a step that sits between the b

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 16:09 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 13:58 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 21:18 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:11 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > Yes. I thought we bumped up that bug in the database so that it'd ge

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 22:07 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > > Just curious, how is it done in RHEL? Just some kind of CI that > analyses all builds or? So we have a step that sits between the build phase and when the resultant packages land in the distro which runs annocheck to validate options used, C

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:50 PM Simo Sorce wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 11:50 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:27 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > > > wrote: > > > > On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > > > I a

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 13:58 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 21:18 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:11 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > Yes. I thought we bumped up that bug in the database so that it'd get > > > some > > > attention in the gcc-10 cycle. But I cou

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 13:53 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 05/06/20 10:26 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > > ... > > > Well, upstreams are not necessarily enabling many security > > > features > > > or > > > optimizations. So you are effectively saying "ups

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 21:18 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:11 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > Yes. I thought we bumped up that bug in the database so that it'd get some > > attention in the gcc-10 cycle. But I couldn't follow it myself, so I don't > > know > > what happened. >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

> On 05/06/20 10:26 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > ... > > Well, upstreams are not necessarily enabling many security features > > or > > optimizations. So you are effectively saying "upstream knows better" > > where I would have to disagree with you. > > Yes, this is a very good point. > > Many of

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 13:36 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Igor Raits wrote: > > ... > > > > Sadly some upstreams insist on clang just because they like it > > more, > > without any technical reason. The question that

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 11:50 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:27 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > > wrote: > > > On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with G

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 01:36:37PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Igor Raits wrote: > > ... > > > > Sadly some upstreams insist on clang just because they like it more, > > without any technical reason. The question that comes to my mind: > > Should we still try to c

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 09:52 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > ... > > Since I was not sure if clang is supported by Red Hat Toolchain team in > the same way as GCC, I've asked this in my reply. If they are supported > in the same manner (maintain

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

> On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Igor Raits wrote: > ... > > Sadly some upstreams insist on clang just because they like it more, > without any technical reason. The question that comes to my mind: > Should we still try to convince upstreams to use GCC in such cases or > not? It happens (choos

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 6/5/20 5:27 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: >> Note that having stuff mix compilers is also a bad idea because LTO is >> compatible across the two compilers. If you want to use LTO, you need >> to use the same compiler across the chain, or stuff will break. >> > Yay thinkos... I mean that LTO is *not* com

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Fabio Valentini wrote on Fri, Jun 05, 2020: > Sorry for being off-topic, but can you (Jeff) please not respond to > the mailing list digest and amend the Subject line manually? > I think it screws up the In-Reply-To (?) header in emails, so every > new email from you creates a new thread (for clien

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:11 PM Jeff Law wrote: > Yes. I thought we bumped up that bug in the database so that it'd get some > attention in the gcc-10 cycle. But I couldn't follow it myself, so I don't > know > what happened. Sorry for being off-topic, but can you (Jeff) please not respond to t

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 20:51 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Jeff Law: > > > As we both know, GCC has had ABI bugs as well. Both compilers strive > > to be ABI compatible with each other and we should continue to work > > together to find and address such issues. SImilarly both compilers > > are

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 11:15:39 -0500 > > From: Steven Munroe > > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: > > CompilerPolicy > > Change > > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Message-ID: > > < > > CAPrKuAohVppTu_B4GDox

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

1:15:39 -0500 > > > From: Steven Munroe > > > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: > > > CompilerPolicy > > > Change > > > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > > Message-ID: > > > < > > > CAPrKuAohVppTu_

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 12:36 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:33 AM Igor Raits < > ignatenkobr...@fedoraproject.org> > wrote: > > > It is slightly different, you need to use `%global toolchain > > clang`, > > but otherwise yes.

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:33 AM Igor Raits wrote: > It is slightly different, you need to use `%global toolchain clang`, > but otherwise yes. > Is this documented somewhere? I've been manually sed'ing out the incompatible flags for PySide2 since it uses some clang only features. Thanks, Richard

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 19:31 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Ben Cotton: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > > > > == Summary == > > Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the > > upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM. This

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 19:23 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Jeff Law: > > > I'm not suggesting switching the default. I'm suggesting the compiler > > choice be made by the upstream projects. Some prefer LLVM, others > > prefer GCC. Fedora should get out of the way and use the same tools > > th

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

* Ben Cotton: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > > == Summary == > Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the > upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM. This > change proposal replaces that policy with one where compiler selectio

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 6/5/20 12:31 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 16:23 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 11:15:39 -0500 From: Steven Munroe Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

* Jeff Law: > I'm not suggesting switching the default. I'm suggesting the compiler > choice be made by the upstream projects. Some prefer LLVM, others > prefer GCC. Fedora should get out of the way and use the same tools > that the upstream projects are using. Do we know how many upstream pro

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 07:58 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > > Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 09:52:09 +0200 > From: Kevin Kofler > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > Change > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Messag

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 14:11 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 14:16:58 +0100 > > From: Ian McInerney > > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > > Change > > To: Development di

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 14:57 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 07:56:57 -0700 > > From: Tom Stellard > > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > > Change > > To: Development di

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:22 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 11:42:36 +0200 > > From: Vít Ondruch > > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > > Change > > To: devel@lists.fedora

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 16:23 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 11:15:39 -0500 > From: Steven Munroe > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > Change > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Message-ID:

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 11:15 -0500, Steven Munroe wrote: > I would also add that Clang/LLVM is missing some of the newer C > language revisions at least for the pppc64le target. > > Both IEEE/ISO _Float128 and _Decimalxx support is missing. Ie the >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:51 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 12:42:30 +0200 > From: Vitaly Zaitsev > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > Change > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Messa

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 06/05/2020 09:15 AM, Steven Munroe wrote: > I would also add that Clang/LLVM is missing some of the newer C > language revisions at least for the pppc64le target. > > Both IEEE/ISO _Float128 and _Decimalxx support is missing. Ie the > type is not supported or if supported basic arithmetic and

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05/06/20 12:46 +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I think that a distribution should be built with a consistent toolchain wherever possible. Clang is much better than GCC nowa

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:51 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > Send devel mailing list submissions to > > Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 12:42:03 +0200 > From: Florian Weimer > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > Change >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

I would also add that Clang/LLVM is missing some of the newer C language revisions at least for the pppc64le target. Both IEEE/ISO _Float128 and _Decimalxx support is missing. Ie the type is not supported or if supported basic arithmetic and math.h support is missing. Also finding bugs for in-lin

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

u...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > devel-ow...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of devel digest..." > > Today's Topics: &

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 12:27 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 08:26:04 -0400 > From: Neal Gompa > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > Change > To: Development discussions related to Fedora >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:27 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > wrote: > > > > On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I > > > think that a distribution should be built wit

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Hi, On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 09:25 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > The LTO bytecode streams do not survive past any given package build. ie, > they > are used within the build, then discarded. They're not supposed to show up in > any installed libraries. > > Thus the fact that the two compilers use tota

Re: System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 12:27 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On 04/06/20 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > > [snip] > > > == Documentation == > > > Severa

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 08:07 -0700, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 06/05/2020 03:42 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 04.06.2020 22:30, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless > > > the > > > upstrea

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 14:38 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 15:23:57 +0100 > From: "Richard W.M. Jones" > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy > Change > To: Development discussions rel

Re: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 07:33 +, devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > -- > > Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 09:16:21 +0200 > From: Frantisek Zatloukal > Subject: Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal:

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 06/05/2020 08:05 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:24 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 08:27:13AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote: On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrot

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 06/05/2020 03:42 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 04.06.2020 22:30, Ben Cotton wrote: >> Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the >> upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM. This >> change proposal replaces that policy with one where compil

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:24 AM Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 08:27:13AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kev

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 06/05/2020 12:09 AM, Igor Raits wrote: > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > >> == Summary == >> Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the >> upstream project for the package only supported Cl

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 08:27:13AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > > wrote: > > > > > > On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05/06/2020 15:16, Ian McInerney wrote: On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:51 PM Stephan Bergmann > wrote: On 05/06/2020 10:15, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > [...] Apart from > browsers, LibreOffice is going to use LLVM/Clang from Release 7.0 too, > so t

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:51 PM Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 05/06/2020 10:15, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > > [...] Apart from > > browsers, LibreOffice is going to use LLVM/Clang from Release 7.0 too, > > so that would potentially be another added work to LibreOffice packagers > > in the future.

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 11:19 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 09:52:09AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > I do not see why we should allow yet another special case for Firefox, nor > > why we should let random packages make their own choice of compiler and > > risk > > running

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05/06/2020 10:15, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: [...] Apart from browsers, LibreOffice is going to use LLVM/Clang from Release 7.0 too, so that would potentially be another added work to LibreOffice packagers in the future. Just to clarify, upstream LibreOffice supports both GCC and Clang on

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:26 AM Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > wrote: > > > > On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I > > > think that a distribution should be built wit

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > > On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I > > think that a distribution should be built with a consistent toolchain > > wherever possible. > > Clang is muc

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 04/06/20 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy > [snip] > > == Documentation == > > Several years ago Red Hat's tools team championed fo

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I > think that a distribution should be built with a consistent toolchain > wherever possible. Clang is much better than GCC nowadays. It has better architecture, support lots of opt

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 04.06.2020 22:30, Ben Cotton wrote: > Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the > upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM. This > change proposal replaces that policy with one where compiler selection > for Fedora follows the package's upstream pref

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

* Igor Raits: > From what I see, GCC supports it on x86, x86_64, s390x, riscv64, > ppc64le. So this just does not include ARM / AArch64 from Fedora > architectures. GCC has aarch64 support for stack-clash-protection, but it only works well with 64K pages (otherwise detection is not reliable). Th

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

Dne 05. 06. 20 v 9:52 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Ben Cotton wrote: >> == Summary == >> Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the >> upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM. This >> change proposal replaces that policy with one where compiler selection

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 09:52:09AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > I do not see why we should allow yet another special case for Firefox, nor > why we should let random packages make their own choice of compiler and risk > running into hidden binary incompatibilities. We have a system compiler for

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 04/06/20 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy [snip] == Documentation == Several years ago Red Hat's tools team championed for Fedora policy to strongly discourage the use of LLVM/Clang for package building. Exceptions were made for packages t

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05/06/20 09:09 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CompilerPolicy == Summary == Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the upstream proj

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05/06/20 10:26 +0200, Igor Raits wrote: Well, upstreams are not necessarily enabling many security features or optimizations. So you are effectively saying "upstream knows better" where I would have to disagree with you. Yes, this is a very good point. Many of Fedora's packages have upstrea

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On 05/06/20 10:23 +0200, Tomáš Popela wrote: On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:56 AM Kevin Kofler wrote: I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I think that a distribution should be built with a consistent toolchain wherever possible. Kevin, that's not true at all. Ma

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 10:15 +0200, Frantisek Zatloukal wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:57 AM Kevin Kofler > wrote: > > > Ben Cotton wrote: > > > == Summary == > > > Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless > > > the > > >

Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:56 AM Kevin Kofler wrote: > I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I > think that a distribution should be built with a consistent toolchain > wherever possible. > Kevin, that's not true at all. Maybe it looks like it builds fine for you,

  1   2   >