Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 11:59:20 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexander Best <arundel@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r216977 - in head/libexec/rtld-elf: amd64 i386 Message-ID: <4D24CD98.9080906@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20110105185944.GA30449@freebsd.org> References: <201101042051.p04KpSGk054564@svn.freebsd.org> <20110105011635.GA4952@freebsd.org> <4D246444.1060904@FreeBSD.org> <20110105185944.GA30449@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/05/2011 10:59, Alexander Best wrote: > judging from the discussion going on right now it seems those flags will be > grouped together to form a new variable. so things will probably change shortly > and fixing the order is probably not necessary. Much better to fix the problem properly now than to rely on future work that may or may not happen. I realize that you alluded to this later in your message, but I think as a general principle this is worth reinforcing. > some people have proposed hacking into clang which i personally think is a very > bad idea. why not contact the clang developers? they might like the idea of a > switch disabling all advanced extensions for every architecture? I agree with this. We have a very awkward situation right now with lots of local hacks in our version of gcc that in an ideal world we would not replicate with clang; particularly considering the much lower barrier to entry when it comes to contributing things back. Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D24CD98.9080906>