Include file search path

[Arnaud Lacombe]

Hi,

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On May 22, 2011, at 9:48 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Warner,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 2, 2011, at 1:10 PM, Robert N. M. Watson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2 Apr 2011, at 19:47, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (2) Working clang/LLVM cross-compile of FreeBSD.  This seems like a basic
>>>>>>>>>  requirement to adopt clang/LLVM, and as far as I'm aware that's not yet a
>>>>>>>>>  resolved issue?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 0 work has been done here to my knowledge.  The world view for clang and our in-tree gcc differ which makes it a challenge.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's disappointing. I seem to recall it's more an issue of our build integration with clang/LLVM than an underlying issue in clang/LLVM?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes.  The problem isn't hard, the cross compile paradigm is just a little different.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We (Cambridge) are currently bringing up FreeBSD on a new soft-core 64-bit MIPS platform.  We're already using a non-base gcc for our boot loader work, and plan to move to using clang/LLVM later in the year.  The base system seems a bit short on detail when it comes to the above, currently.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes.  I've had to add about a dozen changes so far to get close to building with xdev compilers.  A similar number are needed to make it easy to configure and add systree support, I think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sounds like great progress -- do you think we'll ship 9.0 in a "just works" state with regard to this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I sure hope so.  I'd like to have demoable stuff by BSDcan.
>>>>>>
>>>>> BSDCan has passed, has there been any advance made since that discussion ?
>>>>
>>>> It is "demonstrable" but not ready to commit to the tree.  Needs about 4 hours of work that I've had trouble scheduling on it due to work getting busier than I expected.
>>>>
>>> any chances to have a look at the patch or should I wait for the final commit ?
>>>
>> ping ?
>>
> ping ?
>
ping, Warner ?

FWIW, I guess that in 4 months, either you had time to finish the
patch, or I could have found to time to complete it myself based on
your incomplete version. I'd really be interested to benchmark recent,
decent, compiler.

Thanks,
 - Arnaud