GCC withdraw (was: Re: patch to add AES intrinsics to gcc)

[Warner Losh]

On Aug 23, 2013, at 5:16 AM, Kurt Jaeger wrote:

> 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;

No. That breaks non x86 architecutres. gcc must remain in base for now, or there's no bootstrap ability. Nobody has done the lifting to cleanly integrate gcc as a port into buildworld, althogh Brooks' work gets us most of the way there.

Warner