Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 02:20:08 +0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: toolchain@FreeBSD.org, Kurt Jaeger <lists@c0mplx.org>, current@FreeBSD.org, Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> Subject: Re: GCC withdraw Message-ID: <5217A7D8.1030806@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <21414.1377258940@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com> <105E26EE-8471-49D3-AB57-FBE2779CF8D0@FreeBSD.org> <5217413A.9080105@passap.ru> <20130823111647.GT2951@home.opsec.eu> <52174D51.2050601@digsys.bg> <21414.1377258940@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/23/13 7:55 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <52174D51.2050601@digsys.bg>, Daniel Kalchev writes: > >>> - 9.x gcc default and clang in base; >>> - 10.x clang default and gcc in ports; >> I believe this is the best idea so far. As long as these ports work with >> gcc in ports, that is. > +1 > well as I was forced to go back to gcc to get a compiling & running kernel on my VPS (xen) I'm not convinced that clang is there yet. I'd be really grumpy if I had to go through al the ports hoopla to recompile my kernel.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5217A7D8.1030806>