Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 1 Jul 2017 10:37:09 +0100
From:      David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Sid <sid@bsdmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: suggestion for toolchain to have its own directories
Message-ID:  <BAA058F2-7A09-4E7F-AA6C-1A55E8915ABC@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <trinity-b6cb24ec-aace-4614-bb0e-bc2226e9c44a-1498854943936@3capp-mailcom-lxa05>
References:  <trinity-b6cb24ec-aace-4614-bb0e-bc2226e9c44a-1498854943936@3capp-mailcom-lxa05>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 30 Jun 2017, at 21:35, Sid <sid@bsdmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> Wouldn't it make sense for toolchains, compilers and their libraries =
to have their own dedicated top level directories like something under =
/usr/toolchain/ and /usr/local/toolchain/ in the latest FreeBSD =
versions? It would be easier for maintenance, and organization of =
compilers and toolchain components.

Debian does something like this, and it=E2=80=99s a huge pain to work =
with.  The problem is that toolchains are not self-contained monolithic =
components (though gcc likes to pretend that they are).  For example, we =
want gcc and clang to use the same linker, the same C and C++ standard =
library implementations, and the same system headers, irrespective of =
the compiler version.  Things that actually are private to a compiler =
are in separate directories (see /usr/lib/clang, for example).

David




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAA058F2-7A09-4E7F-AA6C-1A55E8915ABC>