Sparc64 support

[Jordan Hubbard]

> On Aug 9, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> What's missing is someone funding / finishing the push to external
> toolchain support for all platforms.

Does someone have that condensed down to a set of bullet points?  Which platforms are mandatory and which are optional?  Is the task considered done when one can do:

# cd /usr/src
# make buildworld buildkernel USE_EXT_TOOLCHAIN=yes EXT_TOOLCHAIN_PORT=gcc-4.9 (or whatever the suitable incantation is?)

Does it have to work for multiple values of “external toolchain”?  Is it a safe assumption to just say that “port install FOO” will be a sufficient prerequisite and /usr/local/bin/cc is all one needs to reference as the right compiler driver (for the C stuff obviously).

If anyone is going to fund anything, they will want a very specific set of deliverables to fund, since it’s otherwise kind of a blank check with a completely arbitrary outcome.

> What's also missing a little bit here is the tier-1-ness of the
> external toolchain support by the people using/developing other
> toolchains.

Not sure what that means?

> It's basically there. There are some rough edges, but since the
> compiler-developer people aren't using it and the non-x86-building
> people aren't being forced to use it, the development inches along
> very slowly.

Again, maybe you could qualify just what that means.  I don’t know what moving parts are even really being described here.  My life is clang / LLVM and has been for a very long time - I don’t even know what gcc is anymore. :)

> If you'd like to erm, "rush" this along, we should actively start the
> "deorbit gcc-4.2 by freebsd-11" and "disconnect gcc-4.2 from the -head
> build" movement now, get those bits done, and start arm-twisting to
> get the last bits finished.

If gcc 4.2 de-orbits then that means that clang / LLVM can take its place as the “default toolchain” in base and any other value of GCC (which?) comes from ports?

- Jordan