compiler info in kernel identification string

Daniel Braniss danny at
Fri Nov 16 10:54:13 UTC 2012

> This is starting to turn into a bikeshed, but anyway...
> on 16/11/2012 12:00 Daniel Braniss said the following:
> > the question as to what compiler was used to compile the kernel is a bit of an
> > oxymoron, since the kernel is made up of many different modules, which get 
> > compiled
> > either by different compilers, or different compiler flags.
> The canonical way to compile a kernel is to use buildkernel and compile modules

this does not guarantee uniformity, just look at the output it produces and 
you will see
different compilers/assemblers/scripts/flags

> along with the kernel.  Other configurations are supported too, of course.

> > since the compiler does 'sign' the modules it compiles (and clang will/should
> > do it soon: some tool like
> > file(1) could be modified to provide it, or config -x (8) ...
> The key word in your note about clang is 'soon' as in 'not yet'.
Dimitry wrote that he will handle it :-)

> Besides, when I see a bug report with a dmesg *I* want to immediately know what
> compiler was used there.
today it's clang vs. gcc -- transition time --, but again it's only part of 
the story,
and soon it will only be noise.

> > IMHO, the only meaningfull information added to uname was the svn/git(and 
> > hopefully hg) rev. version.
> -- 
> Andriy Gapon

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list