From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 6 07:30:20 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 111CE106564A; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 07:30:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35C68FC08; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 07:30:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbmv11 with SMTP id v11so1209322vbm.13 for ; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:30:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=2PZVqPgjTP2NPob/ufbjWTFNT18tvrb3aWLgnkoPeq8=; b=wU7a0yfjgyTtWyIyHFpmm70pcUb31dSqWdQ3YUKlRzec2D96YwVe/e/0AOWcXRTvwd cuDo1drfQNNUlRLoKNgEK3BsnRjVBxo8bclYl3r/PZ9XZSmhC/8mbBDj9PdXaXLsiusx gB4aEYJ3WgITcPsSb+EEcqPBKoBZFz+zH5oPMUD5bYRtRWBqn0X6+mZB30Vrurl4PIan Xlau0dYCIWw5XDyV9OCZBPe6XlX1J+4NOvr4abqdtOVM+HBst9ek7nPj3VKb1H6Uz4zG vMuiFgP6NkJ6adYLIghwF/Ee01o/oDKmZluRcrFqkjzuL79Qm51QF2e2Z/qo2gCNFXO9 wQeA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.84.198 with SMTP id b6mr6219342vez.10.1344238213293; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.238.9 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 00:30:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <501F40DB.900@FreeBSD.org> References: <5015D122.4040608@FreeBSD.org> <501F40DB.900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 07:30:13 +0000 Message-ID: From: "b. f." To: Doug Barton Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Gerald Pfeifer , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Kevin Oberman Subject: Re: lang/gcc46 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: bf1783@gmail.com List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:30:20 -0000 On 8/6/12, Doug Barton wrote: > On 07/31/2012 08:57, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012, Doug Barton wrote: > Just to be clear, you compile stuff with gcc 4.6, that is linked against > libgcc, and then you update to 4.7, with a new libgcc, and everything > still works? If so, that's great, I'm glad to hear that it's not a problem. For the most part, yes. The upstream developers have a policy of avoiding version bumps for the runtime support libraries when possible, and instead using symbol versioning to maintain backward-compatibility. Only a very few pieces of software using libgcj or libobjc will have to be recompiled. For default packages, IIRC, that is only print/pdftk. Of course, it will be to the advantage of most users to recompile their packages with the new version of the compiler. >> In other words, if there is a challenge it's not GCC per se, more >> our packaging of it (and some work Bapt is doing on the packaging >> infrastructure should help with that). > > I don't know of any magic solutions in the works that will solve the > separation of libgcc from the compiler. :) I think Gerald was referring to Bapt's plan to make it easier to make multiple packages from a single port, so that those who used packages exclusively could install a package consisting of only the runtime support libraries, rather than the whole compiler suite. I had patches to do this even without pkgng, but it made things a little more complicated, and didn't seem to be a high priority, so I didn't pursue it. If people feel that it is important, I could work with Gerald to revive that, or use a knob like that of ports/155408 with static linking to allow users to remove the runtime dependency for a lot of software, at the cost of some added overhead from redundancies. b.