From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 30 13:38:51 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E0A6267; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 13:38:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com) Received: from monday.kientzle.com (99-115-135-74.uvs.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [99.115.135.74]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B1042597; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 13:38:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from root@localhost) by monday.kientzle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) id r7UDchn0056534; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 13:38:43 GMT (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com) Received: from [192.168.2.123] (CiscoE3000 [192.168.1.65]) by kientzle.com with SMTP id qqzce2hvvfj8ufc7u4pem92s52; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 13:38:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) Subject: Re: GCC withdraw From: Tim Kientzle In-Reply-To: <53AB1421-BC0C-4F29-B799-721553B3B1DA@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 06:38:41 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <87CD56E4-98CE-4BA4-A9C6-433F9196A5B4@kientzle.com> References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com> <201308291057.43027.jhb@freebsd.org> <8F836479-BC3A-4679-A7AA-3BCDD34AE6C5@FreeBSD.org> <52204746.2070900@freebsd.org> <3C11736737A54D84B80B1D27406F8039@FreeBSD.org> <53AB1421-BC0C-4F29-B799-721553B3B1DA@FreeBSD.org> To: David Chisnall X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) Cc: FreeBSD Current , toolchain@FreeBSD.org, "freebsd-current@freebsd.org CURRENT" , "Sam Fourman Jr." , Boris Samorodov , Jonathan Anderson X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 13:38:51 -0000 I've been reading this thread and must confess that I'm a little = confused about what exactly is being discussed. * I presume we've all agreed that "clang" is installed by default in = FreeBSD-10. * I presume everyone agrees that "cc" is "clang" in FreeBSD-10. * There obviously needs to be a "gcc" command in FreeBSD-10, since "cc" = and "gcc" are synonyms in so many people's finger-memory. Is the debate here just a question of whether "gcc" is "clang" or "the = *real* GCC"? Would it be feasible to install GCC as "gcc42" or something similar so people could still reach it regardless of what the "gcc" alias pointed to? On 30 Aug 2013, at 08:56, Jonathan Anderson = wrote: > ... then people wanting to compile the base system with gcc/g++ ... I'm still curious *why* some people want this? Personally, I would rather compile the base system with the *supported* compiler. Today, on FreeBSD-CURRENT/x86 and FreeBSD-CURRENT/amd64, that is clang. On Aug 30, 2013, at 12:18 AM, Julian Elischer = wrote: > Clang is new. clang WILL HAVE BUGS. Based on my own experience, I would put this rather differently: GCC and Clang are COMPILERS. Therefore, they have DIFFERENT BUGS. This is why I worry about having "cc" and "gcc" be different compilers. Tim