On 03/31/18 11:44, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 31 Mar 2018, at 15:18, Mark Linimon <lini...@lonesome.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 02:42:01PM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
It's been almost 3 months now since clang 6 landed in head, and if
those ports require USE_CXXSTD=gnu++98 to be fixed, why haven't those
already been changed already?
Because it takes a lot of time and effort to do it?
I don't want to belittle anyone's work here, but I am very disappointed
that it apparently takes more than 3 months (half the lifecycle of a
complete upstream llvm release!) to fix broken ports. Don't maintainers
read their email, or care about their ports?
I have been receiving emails for 3 months about a port that broke from
the clang update and while I care about my ports. I am not running
current on the machine where I regularly use that port. It is important
but not urgent.
Thanks to the update I can now start looking a it.
This basically torpedoes the work I've been trying to do to catch tier-2
up to tier-1, on 11. I had been trying to to identify all the problems
that existed beforehand, before starting in on the clang6 ones. (Many
people have also been contributing to fixing clang6/amd64/current errors,
and I wanted to let the work settle, and not duplicate.)
Finally, if this had gone in just two days later, it would not have
affected the Q2 package builds. I could have lived with that a lot more
easily.
I am very disappointed in the timing of this change.
In fact, I thought this was the perfect timing, so that the quarterlies
are built with clang 6, and it has enough time to settle for the 11.2
slush. If this was merged later, somebody else would probably have
grumbled that I had "merged it just before slush". :)
-Dimitry
Pedro.
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
