what's an ifunc?
___
freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-toolchain-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
On 8/30/13 1:02 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 29 Aug 2013, at 15:57, John Baldwin wrote:
I have not seen any convincing
argument as to why leaving GCC in the base for 10.x impedes anything.
Because clang isn't sufficient for so many non-x86 platforms we can't
really start using clang-specifi
On 8/24/13 7:19 PM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 24 Aug 2013, at 11:30, "Sam Fourman Jr." wrote:
So I vote, let's not give ourselves the burden of "lugging" dead weight in
base
for another 5 years. (in 2017 do we still want to be worrying about gcc in
base?)
Perhaps more to the point, in 2017 do
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
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 1/11/13 9:31 PM, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:29:06AM +0100, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 10:49:38PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/misc/rtld-sigblock.3.patch
The new fields td_sigblock_ptr and td_sigblock_val are
On 1/7/13 10:22 AM, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
Below is the forward of the patch for which I failed to obtain a private
review. Might be, the list generates more responses.
Our rtld has a performance bootleneck, typically exposed by the images
with the lot of the run-time relocation processing,
On 1/6/13 10:02 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
Having LLVM/clang in the base system lets us do some interesting things
that we couldn't do with GCC. One is that LLVM ships with a JIT for LLVM
IR as well as components of a toolchain for it (this is what Google's
pNACL uses) and that you can end up pr
