"problems come when we try to us archtiectures not fully supported by out
libgcc_s.so" ( from https://people.freebsd.org/~db/libgcc.txt ). . .
On armv6 (an rpi2) C++ by itself can have /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 not being
sufficient, for example with g++6 being used:
> # g++6 -std=c++14 -O2 cpp_clocks
> Am 20.08.2016 um 22:34 schrieb Doug Hardie :
>
>
>> On 20 August 2016, at 11:50, Rainer Duffner wrote:
>>
>> FreeBSD 10.3 works.
>>
>> FreeBSD 10.1 complains about a failed integrity check etc (which the EN was
>> supposed to fix, I assume)
>>
>>
>> I did run freebsd-update to update to
Unfortunately people (customers, developers, hardward vendors) make
decisions on the basis of bang-for-buck. FreeBSD is consistently
underperforming on benchmarks. And regardless of real-world similarity,
the contrived benchmarks are the best that is used.
If clang (v3.4.1 on 10.3 Stable) reall
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 09:57:24AM +1000, Dewayne Geraghty wrote:
> unless knowledgable people respond publicly and/or in the phoronix
> forums [...] this interpretation of reality will be fixed in decision-
> makers' minds and consequently the uptake (and support) of FreeBSD.
IIRC this has been d
On Mon, 22 Aug 2016, 11:31 AM Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 09:57:24AM +1000, Dewayne Geraghty wrote:
> > unless knowledgable people respond publicly and/or in the phoronix
> > forums [...] this interpretation of reality will be fixed in decision-
> > makers' minds and consequentl
