Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 15:33:00 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 216707] exp-run: Update lang/gcc from GCC 4.9 to GCC 5 Message-ID: <bug-216707-29464-fonvR0Qtsi@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-216707-29464@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-216707-29464@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D216707 Jan Beich (mail not working) <jbeich@FreeBSD.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jbeich@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #17 from Jan Beich (mail not working) <jbeich@FreeBSD.org> --- Hmm, not much bustage thanks to DragonFly dogfooding GCC 5 before us. (In reply to Pedro F. Giffuni from comment #3) > why not jump directly to GCC6 instead of GCC5? Why not GCC 7? exp-runs are slow and often contain false positives. Having = more results at once would speed up fixing similar issues en masse using portmgr hatchet^W blanket, a win in the long run. If there're many misoptimizations= or compiler crashes we can backtrack to GCC 6 or just temporarily pin those few ports to an older version. (In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #4) > I guess it would be at least 50% or more above. (See the dependencies in > PR 196712 for how much pain that last update was.) Still peanuts compared to Clang/libc++ updates. ;) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-216707-29464-fonvR0Qtsi>