On Aug 23, 2013, at 4:01 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> On 8/23/13 3:35 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
>> On 23 Aug 2013, at 10:58, Bernhard Fröhlich wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have
>>> serious
>>> problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is t
On 8/23/13 3:35 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 23 Aug 2013, at 10:58, Bernhard Fröhlich wrote:
I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have serious
problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is the fallback in the
portstree for all ports that are unable to build with
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 06:54:44AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi!
>
> If firewire code doesn't build on clang correctly, have you filed a bug so
> it gets looked at before 10.0 is released? that's pretty broken
> code/behaviour.
How I can do it correctly?
Currently in src.conf:
WITHOUT_CLANG=
On 8/23/13 7:55 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message <52174d51.2050...@digsys.bg>, Daniel Kalchev writes:
- 9.x gcc default and clang in base;
- 10.x clang default and gcc in ports;
I believe this is the best idea so far. As long as these ports work with
gcc in ports, that is.
+1
well as
On 8/23/13 8:26 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 23/08/2013 14:06 David Chisnall said the following:
Our gcc is from 2007. It has no C11, no C++11 support. It has bugs in its
atomic generation so you can't use it sensibly without lots of inline
assembly (which it doesn't support for newer architectu
> As for me I expect something like this:
> . 9.x gcc default and clang in base;
> . 10.x clang default and gcc in base;
> . 11.x gcc withdraw.
There is also the concern whether clang in base will reliably build gcc
required for some ports, and then there are those CPU architectures for which
cl
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 03:02:18PM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> 23.08.2013 13:16, David Chisnall ??:
>
>> I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code
>> slush that removes GCC and libstdc++ from the default build
>> on platforms where clang is the system compiler. We de
On Aug 23, 2013, at 7:54 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2013, at 14:52, Warner Losh wrote:
>> No. That breaks non x86 architecutres. gcc must remain in base for now, or
>> there's no bootstrap ability. Nobody has done the lifting to cleanly
>> integrate gcc as a port into buildworld, alt
On Aug 23, 2013, at 6:30 AM, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 12:06 +0100, David Chisnall wrote:
>> On 23 Aug 2013, at 11:42, Julian Elischer wrote:
>>
>>> no, I believe we have said that 10 would ship with clang by default. NO
>>> mention was made about gcc being absent, and I am unc
Hi!
If firewire code doesn't build on clang correctly, have you filed a bug so
it gets looked at before 10.0 is released? that's pretty broken
code/behaviour.
-adrian
On 23 August 2013 04:46, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 06:42:21PM +0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> >
On 23 Aug 2013, at 14:52, Warner Losh wrote:
> No. That breaks non x86 architecutres. gcc must remain in base for now, or
> there's no bootstrap ability. Nobody has done the lifting to cleanly
> integrate gcc as a port into buildworld, althogh Brooks' work gets us most of
> the way there.
We'
On Aug 23, 2013, at 5:16 AM, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> Hi!
>
>>> I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code
>>> slush that removes GCC and libstdc++ from the default build on
>>> platforms where clang is the system compiler. We definitely don't
>>> want to be supporting our 6-year-o
On Aug 23, 2013, at 5:06 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2013, at 11:42, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
>> no, I believe we have said that 10 would ship with clang by default. NO
>> mention was made about gcc being absent, and I am uncomfortable with taking
>> that step yet. Having gcc just p
On 08/23/13 07:30, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 12:06 +0100, David Chisnall wrote:
On 23 Aug 2013, at 11:42, Julian Elischer wrote:
no, I believe we have said that 10 would ship with clang by default. NO mention
was made about gcc being absent, and I am uncomfortable with taking t
On Aug 23, 2013, at 14:16, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> $ /usr/obj/usr/devel/svn/base/stable/8/make.amd64/make kernel-toolchain
> WITHOUT_CLANG=1 __MAKE_CONF=/dev/null SRCCONF=/dev/null
...
> It seems that the problem is specific to stable/8 and is caused by missing
> -std=gnu89. And that seems to be ca
on 23/08/2013 15:56 David Chisnall said the following:
> So you don't want a working debugger? Our gdb doesn't work at all on MIPS
> and barely works with code compiled with clang or a recent gcc.
I am capable of using devel/gdb. Or do you mean kernel debugger?
> We are
> planning on importing
on 23/08/2013 15:34 Nathan Whitehorn said the following:
> On 08/23/13 07:26, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> on 23/08/2013 14:06 David Chisnall said the following:
>>> Our gcc is from 2007. It has no C11, no C++11 support. It has bugs in its
>>> atomic generation so you can't use it sensibly without lots
On 23 Aug 2013, at 13:26, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> On the other hand these tools are perfect for building FreeBSD kernel and
> base.
> Extrapolating my experience with base GCC I am very confident in it as a
> FreeBSD development tool.
> Extrapolating my experience with Clang I am not yet confident
On 08/23/13 07:26, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 23/08/2013 14:06 David Chisnall said the following:
Our gcc is from 2007. It has no C11, no C++11 support. It has bugs in its
atomic generation so you can't use it sensibly without lots of inline
assembly (which it doesn't support for newer architectur
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
> 23.08.2013 12:58, Bernhard Fröhlich wrote:
>>
>> I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have
>> serious
>> problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is the fallback in the
>> portstree for all ports that are
On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 12:06 +0100, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2013, at 11:42, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> > no, I believe we have said that 10 would ship with clang by default. NO
> > mention was made about gcc being absent, and I am uncomfortable with taking
> > that step yet. Having gcc
on 23/08/2013 14:06 David Chisnall said the following:
> Our gcc is from 2007. It has no C11, no C++11 support. It has bugs in its
> atomic generation so you can't use it sensibly without lots of inline
> assembly (which it doesn't support for newer architectures) for
> multithreaded things.
>
>
$ /usr/obj/usr/devel/svn/base/stable/8/make.amd64/make kernel-toolchain
WITHOUT_CLANG=1 __MAKE_CONF=/dev/null SRCCONF=/dev/null
...
cc -O2 -pipe -DIN_GCC -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
-DPREFIX=\"/usr/obj/usr/devel/svn/base/stable/8/tmp/usr\"
-I/usr/obj/usr/devel/svn/base/stable/8/tmp/usr/devel/svn/base/stable
23.08.2013 12:58, Bernhard Fröhlich wrote:
I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have serious
problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is the fallback in the
portstree for all ports that are unable to build with clang which was introduced
when HEAD switched to clan
In message <52174d51.2050...@digsys.bg>, Daniel Kalchev writes:
>> - 9.x gcc default and clang in base;
>> - 10.x clang default and gcc in ports;
>
>I believe this is the best idea so far. As long as these ports work with
>gcc in ports, that is.
+1
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog
On 23.08.13 14:16, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Hi!
I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code
slush that removes GCC and libstdc++ from the default build on
platforms where clang is the system compiler. We definitely don't
want to be supporting our 6-year-old versions of these for the
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 06:42:21PM +0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 8/23/13 6:35 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> > On 23 Aug 2013, at 10:58, Bernhard Fr?hlich wrote:
> >
> >> I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have
> >> serious
> >> problems to ship packages for 10. U
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:35 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2013, at 10:58, Bernhard Fröhlich wrote:
>
>> I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have serious
>> problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is the fallback in the
>> portstree for all ports that a
23.08.2013 15:16, Kurt Jaeger пишет:
> Hi!
>
>>> I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code
>>> slush that removes GCC and libstdc++ from the default build on
>>> platforms where clang is the system compiler. We definitely don't
>>> want to be supporting our 6-year-old versions o
Hi!
> > I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code
> > slush that removes GCC and libstdc++ from the default build on
> > platforms where clang is the system compiler. We definitely don't
> > want to be supporting our 6-year-old versions of these for the
> > lifetime of the 10.x
On 23 Aug 2013, at 11:42, Julian Elischer wrote:
> no, I believe we have said that 10 would ship with clang by default. NO
> mention was made about gcc being absent, and I am uncomfortable with taking
> that step yet. Having gcc just present, will not hurt you.. even after it is
> gone we wil
23.08.2013 13:16, David Chisnall пишет:
> I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code slush that
> removes GCC and libstdc++ from the default build on platforms where clang is
> the system compiler. We definitely don't want to be supporting our
> 6-year-old versions of these fo
On 8/23/13 6:35 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 23 Aug 2013, at 10:58, Bernhard Fröhlich wrote:
I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have serious
problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is the fallback in the
portstree for all ports that are unable to build with
On 23 Aug 2013, at 10:58, Bernhard Fröhlich wrote:
> I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have serious
> problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is the fallback in the
> portstree for all ports that are unable to build with clang which was
> introduced
> when HE
I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have serious
problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is the fallback in the
portstree for all ports that are unable to build with clang which was introduced
when HEAD switched to clang as default cc. Right now there are 150 port
on 23/08/2013 12:16 David Chisnall said the following:
> I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code slush that
> removes GCC and libstdc++ from the default build on platforms where clang
> is the system compiler. We definitely don't want to be supporting our
> 6-year-old versions
I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code slush that removes
GCC and libstdc++ from the default build on platforms where clang is the system
compiler. We definitely don't want to be supporting our 6-year-old versions of
these for the lifetime of the 10.x branch.
David
On 2
37 matches
Mail list logo
