On Wed Jan  5 11, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 05, 2011 3:38:16 pm Alexander Best wrote:
> > On Wed Jan  5 11, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, January 05, 2011 2:59:20 pm Doug Barton wrote:
> > > > On 01/05/2011 10:59, Alexander Best wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > judging from the discussion going on right now it seems those flags 
> > > > > will be
> > > > > grouped together to form a new variable. so things will probably 
> > > > > change shortly
> > > > > and fixing the order is probably not necessary.
> > > > 
> > > > Much better to fix the problem properly now than to rely on future work 
> > > > that may or may not happen. I realize that you alluded to this later in 
> > > > your message, but I think as a general principle this is worth 
> > > > reinforcing.
> > > > 
> > > > > some people have proposed hacking into clang which i personally think 
> > > > > is a very
> > > > > bad idea. why not contact the clang developers? they might like the 
> > > > > idea of a
> > > > > switch disabling all advanced extensions for every architecture?
> > > > 
> > > > I agree with this. We have a very awkward situation right now with lots 
> > > > of local hacks in our version of gcc that in an ideal world we would 
> > > > not 
> > > > replicate with clang; particularly considering the much lower barrier 
> > > > to 
> > > > entry when it comes to contributing things back.
> > > 
> > > My suggestion was that we ask clang to add a '-mno-whatever' and 
> > > hopefully we
> > > could convince gcc to follow suit.  clang developers seem to be fairly
> > > receptive, so I was hoping one of our clang liaisons could suggest it. :)
> > 
> > why gcc? even if they decide to add such a switch it will be gpl3'ed. 
> > shouldn't
> > gcc with clang at hand be considered legacy software?
> 
> I think a more realistic view is that some folks will want to use a gpl3
> toolchain (e.g. platforms clang doesn't support (or support well) which
> need newer binutils, etc.).  The gpl3 bits don't have to live in the tree,
> but I think our build infrastructure should support using them as an
> external toolchain.

good point. would be nice to be able to do
echo "CC = gcc46" >> /etc/src.conf

... expecially for benchmarking clang vs. a recent gcc for world/kernel.

cheers.
alex

> 
> -- 
> John Baldwin

-- 
a13x
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to