[Patch] Proposal: USE_GNU89 switch

[Diane Bruce]

Hi,

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 04:34:43PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
> * Gabor Kovesdan <gabor at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > As for LLVM, probably it won't work out for the whole ports
> > tree. I don't know what's the portmgr opinion on this, if we start to
> > use LLVM in Ports Collection, we should reconsider the knob, though.

As the plan is to have both gcc + clang in -9 we are still going to
run into this problem. I would expect a lot of users are going to
just expect ports to work with clang as well as gcc.

> LLVM/Clang support is trivial. Erwin Lansing fired up an experimental
> ports build for us and the numbers are *very* promising. There are still
> some issues with the compiler itself, but so far it seems the only
> architectural change to the tree that needs to be made, is a hint to
> fall back to C89.

By the time FreeBSD-9 is released clang support will be solid and all ports
will compile with clang as well as gcc. Clang was chosen because of their
committment to have full gcc compatibility.

>
> This is not just about LLVM/Clang support. If the GCC folks ever decide
> to switch to C99 by default, we'll have exactly the same issue.

Agreed.

I don't see the harm in trying Ed_'s diff on a exp. run with both gcc
and clang and compare a gcc run with a stock run. Perhaps this is something
Itetcu could help with.

- Diane
--
- db at FreeBSD.org db at db.net http://www.db.net/~db