Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Sep 2012 10:03:15 -0500
From:      Jeremy Messenger <mezz.freebsd@gmail.com>
To:        Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
Cc:        toolchain@freebsd.org, Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th
Message-ID:  <CADLFttfMc-7EyKsdfcWWzb5fsrwYmw4qQAYiq6HDmViNjqArXg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120911122122.GJ37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
References:  <20120910211207.GC64920@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <20120911104518.GF37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20120911120649.GA52235@freebsd.org> <20120911122122.GJ37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Konstantin Belousov
<kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> Can you, please, read what I wrote ? Fixing _ports_ to compile with
> clang is plain wrong. Upstream developers use gcc almost always for
> development and testing. Establishing another constant cost on the
> porting work puts burden on the ports submitters, maintainers and even
> ports users.
>
> I do strongly oppose the attempt to drain the freebsd resources by
> forcing porters to port third-party code to other compiler.

I agree with this pretty much.

I haven't done fix any of port build with clang as I simply ignore
clang (sorry). When user report to me and I tell them to stick with
GCC as I don't support it.

Cheers,
Mezz


-- 
mezz.freebsd@gmail.com - mezz@FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLFttfMc-7EyKsdfcWWzb5fsrwYmw4qQAYiq6HDmViNjqArXg>