From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 11 20:00:10 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37A0B9D0 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:00:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from decke@bluelife.at) Received: from mail-oa0-x235.google.com (mail-oa0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::235]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C4F1999 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:00:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id k18so3576453oag.26 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:00:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bluelife.at; s=google; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=BpD8VdUHEviMygU7wdvPXmp+KC4TP8Dhly8X5THTxYI=; b=WcPMsMC0q+JMPn7cj1FQQAoTWx94HuoRYXCbkBfSfeGzjWYv03TPw9Js2kAWP4o6Y/ z40TtagPgAlbB+mRPk/tu5GecfmaR6oGr46a+Hz/WTf562HxRA7M4qUq5jUBh+qdjic4 EkFjbK2l34d6ZVrqEWqB/WnyfjaxqosP2Ki0o= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=BpD8VdUHEviMygU7wdvPXmp+KC4TP8Dhly8X5THTxYI=; b=cySpD1iGT1DecCjigP5BuYapEiuBzL+XSXfE0XU2WZe7+KKpYQ245WNunhstRo69lw 3LOcmS5CV6/v1AdNJYGGYesGbZ73HGIsXMXtSpN8VeqsbbxUfALlzzbRhvsbu+ZVjJ/d AgL+yHWgrw6XczlM6uf+p5fdi/cSfOLXbQj9qtrxxN5krXc6apkp/ItsZOtiOoPn5sR4 4J4KRBRzl5/RNa/ItbpCeRkY0HhKxsdUzxALXPMbv2Yc2/CO8Qsamkiwe3MzkU91i7/+ urMbT0vpjNfDNSzbyF3K1OyRaucwvXlUnjMmoXCq599PwLYy4txRHckHs/IF5xNAJnE3 Vx6g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.85.39 with SMTP id e7mr13310390oez.94.1370980809358; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:00:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.170.65 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:00:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [89.144.192.150] Received: by 10.76.170.65 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:00:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130611192156.GU3047@kib.kiev.ua> References: <249D4A03-A62A-4033-9757-AF308D4422FF@FreeBSD.org> <20130611192156.GU3047@kib.kiev.ua> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 22:00:09 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [CFH] FreeBSD 10 and ports From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bernhard_Fr=F6hlich?= To: Konstantin Belousov X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlu20MXBetZLfFBo0kYzNujOSUqgNZVCEnyaol69PIQeAhYM+PZBGgOiYGaGy0BRtpsJTbC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: "ports@freebsd.org Ports" , Martin Wilke X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:00:10 -0000 Am 11.06.2013 21:22 schrieb "Konstantin Belousov" : > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 02:50:03PM +0800, Martin Wilke wrote: > > > > Dear All, > > > > As we all know FreeBSD 10 brings a new compiler along, and for that we need to get ports on the right > > track. I have done several exp-runs on the current src and we still have a lot of fallouts. We > > would like to ask you to have a look [1] at the failed ports and help to fix them. We will start this week > > an i386 exp-run to see how the status is. > > > > Thanks for your time. > > > > - Martin on behalf of portmgr > > > > [1]http://pointyhat-west.isc.freebsd.org/errorlogs/amd64-10-exp-latest/ > > Didn't a sort of consensus when switching to clang for base was > discussed, was that ports would start use a port-provided version of gcc > ? The adoption of the ports gcc was stalled due to the unability to make > exp-runs, AFAIK. > > What you are proposing is de-facto forking the whole open-source code > base. This cannot work, and in fact steals the FreeBSD resources for > something which has absolutely no relevance for FreeBSD project. > > Ports should not be forced to use clang, either a ports gcc work > should be finished, or cc in HEAD switched back to gcc. This is > de-facto blocker for the 10.0. Yes we are working on that and though it's still in an early phase we already know that we have to switch the full toolchain - which is a lot of work. This project can be seen as a midterm goal but it's unsure yet if we can finish it before 10.0 but we will find out pretty soon. In the meantime bapt and a few others have managed to fix quite a few ports and managed to build a high number of ports with clang 3.3 already. So it does not look that unrealistic anymore. There has been no decision yet what the right way to proceed is but fixing stuff for clang has proven to be worth the effort because newer gcc seems to hit quite similar problems.