Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 14:55:13 +0100 From: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> To: Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Compiling ports in a post-9.0-RELEASE world Message-ID: <20110313135513.GA65945@alchemy.franken.de> In-Reply-To: <20110313120507.GA75195@megatron.madpilot.net> References: <4D7BED01.6000506@FreeBSD.org> <20110313120507.GA75195@megatron.madpilot.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 01:05:07PM +0100, Guido Falsi wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 02:00:33PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > > Howdy, > > > > As many of you are no doubt already aware, much work has been > > undertaken to make clang the default compiler for the src tree > > starting with 9.0-RELEASE. It is not 100% certain that this change > > will be made, but it's looking more likely every day. Actually, originally it was outlined that GCC would stay the default in FreeBSD 9 in any case: http://wiki.freebsd.org/201005ToolchainSummitSummary "GCC will continue to be built and installed as cc/c++ by default." IIRC this statement so far was repeated on mailing lists. > > > > This raises an interesting question for how to deal with compiling > > ports after 9.0 is released. So far there are 2 main ideas for how > > to deal with this: > > > > 1. Fix all ports to compile with both gcc 4.2 (for RELENG_[78]) and clang. > > This perhaps would be bst, but...(see below) > > > 2. Adopt an official "ports compiler," which would likely be one of > > the gcc versions from the ports tree itself, and update all ports to > > work with it. > > Since most of the software in the ports tree tends to be quite linux > or gcc centric I think 2 is the only viable option. > > BTW I'd suggest a variation to 2. I think some option like "CLANG_SAFE" > or "USE_CLANG"(just saying, perhaps a better name can be found) > should be added to the infrastructure so, on 9.x and newer systems, > maintainer can sign that their port does build using the system > compiler. Obviously for ports having dependencies, especially > libraries, some extra testing should be performed to make sure > depending ports, which could use a different compiler, link correctly. > Given that clang so far only is a viable alternative on x86 if at all option 2 or the proposed variation of it would also be a necessary precursor for !x86, assuming that eventually clang will be the default for x86 (or whatever architectures it then is en par with GCC). For !x86 CLANG_SAFE or whatever then would be a NOP. Wasn't there a GSoC project aimed at implementing something like that in the ports infrastructure? Marius
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110313135513.GA65945>