From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Jun  4 21:11:14 2005
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8549816A41C;
	Sat,  4 Jun 2005 21:11:14 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com)
Received: from vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
	[128.131.111.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E89943D49;
	Sat,  4 Jun 2005 21:11:14 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com)
Received: from [128.131.111.60] (acrux [128.131.111.60])
	by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5626913789; Sat,  4 Jun 2005 23:11:12 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 23:11:18 +0200 (CEST)
From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050603063042.GA57593@dragon.NUXI.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.62.0506041326230.70935@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
References: <200506030142.j531gsp5005110@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20050603063042.GA57593@dragon.NUXI.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org,
	Edwin Groothuis <edwin@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/Mk bsd.gcc.mk
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 21:11:14 -0000

On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 01:42:54AM +0000, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
>>       2. Prefer the highest version # found already installed and allowed
>>          by the USE_GCC invocation, rather than the lowest.
> ..
>>   #1 and #3 are implemented with this patch, but #2 isn't.
> Thank you for this change.

Certainly an improvement.  Thanks!

>>   The reason for it is because there is no highest version # specifiable
>>   with the USE_GCC command. What could be made is that the USE_GCC
>>   command accepts two arguments, where the first is the lower version,
>>   the second is the upper version. Or USE_GCC=-4.0, where everything
>>   <= 4.0 is allowed.
> How is this different than say having a releng4 system with gcc41
> installed and USE_GCC=3.2+?  gcc41 would be used as would gcc42 when it
> came out - as both satisfy the "3.2+" specification.  While it might be
> nice to be able to specify a newest GCC version limit we do not have that
> support today.  But we do now the highest version number to start
> with - the highest version encoded in bsd.gcc.mk.

It like to propose that for all those cases where we currently have 
USE_GCC, we try to make this USE_GCC=3.4+ because this will significantly
reduce all the different scenarios our users may run into (and which we
never tested) and GCC 3.4. is the system compiler for 5.x and 6.x.

Also, it would be great could Kris do a pointyhat run where every 
USE_GCC=x.y+ (note the +) is translated to USE_GCC=4.1 or at least
4.0; this surely will help us shake out all sorts of bugs in ports.

Gerald