From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 8 09:24:36 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BFA33DF; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 09:24:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [46.4.40.135]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F0D119E9; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 09:24:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lion.home.serebryakov.spb.ru (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:923f:1:cc06:8a07:85a3:8279]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9A5044AC3A; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 13:24:32 +0400 (MSK) Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2014 13:24:25 +0400 From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <686179459.20140208132425@serebryakov.spb.ru> To: John Marino Subject: Re: USE_GCC politic -- why so many ports has it as runtime dependency? In-Reply-To: <52F5EB97.5040603@marino.st> References: <1133138786.20140207202949@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1228142552.20140208033432@serebryakov.spb.ru> <52F56EB9.4010700@marino.st> <1955647943.20140208122042@serebryakov.spb.ru> <52F5EB97.5040603@marino.st> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: ports@freebsd.org, marino@freebsd.org, Dimitry Andric X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2014 09:24:36 -0000 Hello, John. You wrote 8 =D1=84=D0=B5=D0=B2=D1=80=D0=B0=D0=BB=D1=8F 2014 =D0=B3., 12:32:= 23: >> JM> dynamically linked libraries. >> JM> libcstd++ >> JM> libgfortran >> JM> libquadmath >> JM> libssp >> JM> libgcc_s >> JM> etc,etc >> 90% of USE_GCC-ports don't use libgrotran & libquadmath. Many of them >> doesn;t use libstdc++. virtualbox-ose-additions DOESN'T USAE ANY OF THESE >> LIBRARIES! And I think, it is not unique in this regard! >>=20 >> And, of course, 99.9% of them doesn't use Java! JM> It doesn't matter, you get everything that is built by default. And you JM> need everything by default because sometimes gcc is needed for c++, JM> sometimes it's needed for fortran, sometimes it's needed for Ada JM> (gcc-aux), often the package has object files produced by different JM> languages but needs the same compiler to build them all. (sigh). I now how it is done now. Again, I try to say, that it should be changed. For example, gcc port could be split into gcc/g++/gfrotran/gcc-aux/gcj/runtime ports. 90% of software need gcc and/or g++. I never used gfortran or gnu ADA and I never-ever hear about projects, which need specifically gcj, especially when we have native OpenJDK7! Look at QT, for example. It is splitted to components. JM> So the only way to reduce unnecessary libraries is turn them off by JM> default, but that breaks lots of ports so you wouldn't do it. I speak about unnecessary binaries, headers and stuff like that here. Look, gcc-4.6.4 - 567.0MiB binutils-2.24 - 49.2MiB mpfr-3.1.2 - 1.6MiB mpc-1.2.0 - 0.4MiB gmp-5.1.3 - 2.3MiB (all data by "pkg info" output) At same time: libstdc++.so.6 - 5.5MiB libgcc_s.so - 0.4MiB libssp.so - 0.0MiB. I'm sure, that 90% of USE_GCC ports use only these three libraries. It is less than 1% of full toolchain size. You think it is Ok? Several ports could use libgfortran.so.3 (4.7MiB), libobjc.so.3 (0.5MiB) and libquadmath.so.0 (0.7MiB). I suspect, we don't have binary package, which needs libgcj.so libgcj-tools.so (179MiB combined!). JM> If you have the gcc dynamic libraries, you have the gcc that uses them. It is not obvious. Yes, now I have, but these libraries (10MiB) will work perfectly well without all other files (600MiB). JM> If you have the gcc that uses them, it has a runtime dependency on the JM> binutils that built it. All gcc built on FreeBSD have a dependency on JM> modern binutils (Not DragonFly though as they have binutils 2.22 and now JM> 2.24 in base). See above. virtualbox-ose-additions doesn't need assembler or linker or e= ven compiler (ANY compiler) to work. Or any library, for that matter. Many ports needs one or two libraries, but not all this madness. JM> Unless the packages are purely static the entire gcc setup gets pulled JM> in. It is how we do things now, but it is not only way to do it and not better way for sure. JM> Like I said above, if you don't fix *ALL* of them, there's no point to JM> working on any of them. Any port with USE_GCC=3Dyes will pull in JM> everything anyway, so you'd have to kill them all. It is perfectionism. May be, if we cover 50% of ports, but 50% which is used by 95% of non-developing users (and other 50% is rarely used) it is success. --=20 // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov