From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Aug 23 11:16:51 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: toolchain@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 B4294956;
 Fri, 23 Aug 2013 11:16:51 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from lists@c0mplx.org)
Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 715C62EDA;
 Fri, 23 Aug 2013 11:16:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <lists@c0mplx.org>)
 id 1VCpMF-000ECZ-Qc; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:16:47 +0200
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:16:47 +0200
From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@c0mplx.org>
To: current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: GCC withdraw (was: Re: patch to add AES intrinsics to gcc)
Message-ID: <20130823111647.GT2951@home.opsec.eu>
References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com>
 <105E26EE-8471-49D3-AB57-FBE2779CF8D0@FreeBSD.org>
 <5217413A.9080105@passap.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5217413A.9080105@passap.ru>
Cc: toolchain@FreeBSD.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain
 <freebsd-toolchain.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-toolchain>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 11:16:51 -0000

Hi!

> > I have a patch that I intend to commit before the 10.0 code
> > slush that removes GCC and libstdc++ from the default build on
> > platforms where clang is the system compiler.  We definitely don't
> > want to be supporting our 6-year-old versions of these for the
> > lifetime of the 10.x branch.
> 
> Isn't it a POLA violation?
> 
> As for me I expect something like this:
> . 9.x gcc default and clang in base;
> . 10.x clang default and gcc in base;
> . 11.x gcc withdraw.

If the 150 ports that only work with gcc, all work with a ports
gcc and do not need the gcc from base, would the following be OK ?

- 9.x gcc default and clang in base;
- 10.x clang default and gcc in ports;

-- 
pi@opsec.eu            +49 171 3101372                         7 years to go !