I'd add one more thing that needs fixing:
Clang should default to c89 mode when invoked as cc. I had a patch to do this,
but I seem to have misplaced it. I'll try to find or rewrite it in the next
couple of days.
A lot of the ports failures I saw were due to ports using cc as the default C
On 2012-09-11 09:58, David Chisnall wrote:
Clang should default to c89 mode when invoked as cc. I had a patch to do this,
but I seem to have misplaced it. I'll try to find or rewrite it in the next
couple of days.
A lot of the ports failures I saw were due to ports using cc as the default C
On 11 Sep 2012, at 09:18, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> So I am a bit reluctant to change clang's default standard to c89,
> unless clang upstream agrees with this. In the interest of prodding
> people to update their software, I would rather have the default stay
> c99, personally. :)
I'm not proposi
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:54:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> As of last week, 4,680 ports out of 23,857 failed to build with clang on
> 9-amd64. That's almost a 20% failure rate. Until we have better support
> for either building ports with clang, or have better support for the
> idea of a "ports
On 09/11/2012 02:27 AM, Lars Engels wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:54:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> As of last week, 4,680 ports out of 23,857 failed to build with clang on
>> 9-amd64. That's almost a 20% failure rate. Until we have better support
>> for either building ports with clang, o
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 1:19 AM, David Xu wrote:
> On 2012/09/08 23:31, Kim Culhan wrote:
>>
>> clock_getcpuclockid() was added a few weeks ago according to the man page
>> and
>> I'm seeing this error while building the port net/freeswith-core-devel.
>>
>> The function is used in the Sofia-sip s
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:12:07PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> [Please confine your replies to toolch...@freebsd.org to keep the thread
> on the most relevant list.]
I do not see how removing current@ can be done, toolchain@ is not
relevant for this discussion. Proposed is not a local change in th
> > tl;dr: Clang will become the default compiler for x86 architectures on
> > 2012-11-04
>
> There was a chorus of voices talking about ports already. My POV
> is that suggesting to 'fix remaining ports to work with clang' is
> just a nonsense. You are proposing to fork the development of all th
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:06:49PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
> > > tl;dr: Clang will become the default compiler for x86 architectures on
> > > 2012-11-04
> >
> > There was a chorus of voices talking about ports already. My POV
> > is that suggesting to 'fix remaining ports to work with clang'
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 03:21:22PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:06:49PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
> > > > tl;dr: Clang will become the default compiler for x86 architectures on
> > > > 2012-11-04
> > >
> > > There was a chorus of voices talking about ports alre
Roman,
Den 11/09/2012 kl. 14.38 skrev Roman Divacky :
>
> Upstream developers almost never use gcc4.2.1 as we do. So right now the
> ports maintainer must check whats wrong in the case the (upgraded) port
> doesnt compile with our in-tree gcc.
>
>
> It can be trivial USE_GCC=4.something but the
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:06:49PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
> > > tl;dr: Clang will become the default compiler for x86 architectures on
> > > 2012-11-04
>
> > Another issue with the switch, which seems to be not only not addressed,
> > but even not talked about, is the performance impact of t
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:52:20PM +0200, Erik Cederstrand wrote:
> Den 11/09/2012 kl. 14.38 skrev Roman Divacky :
> > By the nature of "developing the OS" we are forced to use compilers and
> > toolchains. Recently I saw you submitting/committing patches with .byte
> > sequences because our defaul
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> Interest twist of history. GCC is not abandonware.
Correct, but GCC 4.2.1 is.
--
chs,
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsu
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 01:45:18PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:12:07PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > For the past several years we've been working towards migrating from
> > GCC to Clang/LLVM as our default compiler. We intend to ship FreeBSD
> > 10.0 with Clang
On 2012-09-11 15:24, Steve Kargl wrote:
...
How fast clang builds world in comparison to gcc is irrelevant.
Not at all irrelevant: this proposal is about changing the default
compiler for the FreeBSD system itself, not for all software out there.
If certain software performs significantly bett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/11/12 09:44, Christer Solskogen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Steve Kargl
> wrote:
>> Interest twist of history. GCC is not abandonware.
>
> Correct, but GCC 4.2.1 is.
>
While this may be true, I'm not inclined to move any of my
On 11-09-2012 16:10, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2012-09-11 15:24, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> What is important is whether software built with clang functions
>> correctly. See for example,
>>
>> http://math-atlas.sourceforge.net/errata.html#WhatComp
>
> Yes, maths support, specifically precision, is a
On 11 Sep 2012 13:22, "Konstantin Belousov" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:06:49PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
> > > > tl;dr: Clang will become the default compiler for x86 architectures
on 2012-11-04
> > >
> > > There was a chorus of voices talking about ports already. My POV
> > > is that
On 9/11/12, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 01:45:18PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:12:07PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
>> > For the past several years we've been working towards migrating from
>> > GCC to Clang/LLVM as our default compiler. We inte
On 2012-09-11 16:27, Tijl Coosemans wrote:> On 11-09-2012 16:10, Dimitry Andric
wrote:
...
Yes, maths support, specifically precision, is admittedly still one of
clang's (really llvm's) weaker points. It is currently not really a
high priority item for upstream.
This is obviously something tha
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Konstantin Belousov
wrote:
> Can you, please, read what I wrote ? Fixing _ports_ to compile with
> clang is plain wrong. Upstream developers use gcc almost always for
> development and testing. Establishing another constant cost on the
> porting work puts burden o
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:10:13PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2012-09-11 15:24, Steve Kargl wrote:
> ...
> >How fast clang builds world in comparison to gcc is irrelevant.
>
> Not at all irrelevant: this proposal is about changing the default
> compiler for the FreeBSD system itself, not fo
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:27:55PM +0200, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On 11-09-2012 16:10, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> > On 2012-09-11 15:24, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >> What is important is whether software built with clang functions
> >> correctly. See for example,
> >>
> >> http://math-atlas.sourceforge.ne
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:06:49PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
We currently dont compile 4680 ports (out of 23857). Top 10 ports that prevent
the most other ports from compiling together prevent ports from
compilation. So if we fixed those 1
On Sep 11, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:06:49PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
>>>
>>> We currently dont compile 4680 ports (out of 23857). Top 10 ports that
>>> prevent
>>> the most other ports from compi
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Sep 11, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:06:49PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
We currently dont compile 4680 ports (out of 23857). Top
Hi,
I upgraded to head/ r239865 (Last Changed Date: 2012-09-11 09:29:50).
My laptop now panics with on boot with the new kernel.
Backtrace (and hopefully some useful) information is attached. I can
provide any additional information necessary.
Regards,
Glen
Script started on Tue Sep 11 12:03
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:12:34PM -0400, Glen Barber wrote:
G> Hi,
G>
G> I upgraded to head/ r239865 (Last Changed Date: 2012-09-11 09:29:50).
G>
G> My laptop now panics with on boot with the new kernel.
G>
G> Backtrace (and hopefully some useful) information is attached. I can
G> provide any
Hello;
Just my $0.02.
- Original Message -
...
> Can you, please, read what I wrote ? Fixing _ports_ to compile with
> clang is plain wrong. Upstream developers use gcc almost always for
> development and testing. Establishing another constant cost on the
> porting work puts burden on
--On September 11, 2012 2:44:03 AM -0700 Doug Barton
wrote:
Doug, as you can already use CLANG instead of GCC now, you will be able
to use GCC instead of CLANG after November 4th.
There's lots of things I _can_ do, what we're discussing is what the
defaults should be.
At the moment the port
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 08:19:54PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> G> I upgraded to head/ r239865 (Last Changed Date: 2012-09-11 09:29:50).
> G>
> G> My laptop now panics with on boot with the new kernel.
> G>
>
> I'd blame this one:
>
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2012-S
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:10:24 -0500, Michael Butler
wrote:
- From the link (http://math-atlas.sourceforge.net/errata.html#WhatComp)
that Steve Kargl referenced (dated July 2012).
I don't know where this guy is getting his info, but CLANG is /more/
standards compliant and doesn't have an i
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 09:27:07AM -0700, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hello;
>
> Just my $0.02.
>
> - Original Message -
> ...
> > Can you, please, read what I wrote ? Fixing _ports_ to compile with
> > clang is plain wrong. Upstream developers use gcc almost always for
> > development and
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:42:53AM -0500, Mark Felder wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:10:24 -0500, Michael Butler
> wrote:
>
> >- From the link (http://math-atlas.sourceforge.net/errata.html#WhatComp)
> >that Steve Kargl referenced (dated July 2012).
>
>
> I don't know where this guy is getti
"Clang produces incorrect code" vs "Clang's floating point has issues" are two
different arguments.
For a mathematical application it would be stupid to use clang if this is the
case. I see no problem with it being the default compiler though. If Atlas is
in ports the maintainer can just force
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 08:12:30AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:27:55PM +0200, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> > On 11-09-2012 16:10, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> > > On 2012-09-11 15:24, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > >> What is important is whether software built with clang functions
> > >>
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:14:09PM -0500, Mark Felder wrote:
> "Clang produces incorrect code" vs "Clang's floating point has
> issues" are two different arguments.
Wow. clang produces incorrect floating point code, and
that's somehow just an issue with floating point.
> For a mathematical appl
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Roman Divacky wrote:
>
> Can you please provide a small self contained test case that shows
> that clang is doing worse on accuracy than gcc?
>
> So that we can analyze it and decide if it's a bug in the code or
> in the compiler. So far we know absolutely nothing.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 07:19:48PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 08:12:30AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > I'm not sure if anyone has done any extensive testing.
> > I've started to run some of my test codes to compare
> > certain functions in a clang-compiled libm, gcc-
Thank you for taking time to explain the situation. I don't follow as closely
as many on the current list do (and not subbed to toolchain).
I'm sure the libm situation is on many people's radar now. Hopefully this can
be resolved.
My apologies for being so daft :-)
___
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:07:04AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote:
> There is some logic in the clang driver already for knowing when it is
> invoked as gcc. I'd be quite tempted to make gcc a symlink to clang
> and make clang default to gnu89 when invoked in that way.
And how then does a port say "
Le Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:12:07 -0500,
Brooks Davis a écrit :
Hello,
> For the past several years we've been working towards migrating from
> GCC to Clang/LLVM as our default compiler. We intend to ship FreeBSD
> 10.0 with Clang as the default compiler on i386 and amd64 platforms.
> To this end, w
On Tuesday 11 September 2012 17:16:35 Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 10/09/2012 16:54, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > For those that want to try the Raspberry PI and its USB ports:
> >
> > Add this to "sys/conf/files":
> >
> > dev/usb/controller/dwc_otg.coptional dwcotg
> > a
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:07:04AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote:
>> There is some logic in the clang driver already for knowing when it is
>> invoked as gcc. I'd be quite tempted to make gcc a symlink to clang
>> and make clang default to gnu8
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 September 2012 17:16:35 Ivan Voras wrote:
>> On 10/09/2012 16:54, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > For those that want to try the Raspberry PI and its USB ports:
>> >
>> > Add this to "sys/conf/files":
>> >
>>
46 matches
Mail list logo
