Compiling ports in a post-9.0-RELEASE world
mexas at bristol.ac.uk
Wed Mar 16 09:39:40 UTC 2011
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 10:19:48AM +0100, Erwin Lansing wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 09:20:40PM +0300, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> > 13.03.2011, 01:00, "Doug Barton" <dougb at FreeBSD.org>:
> > > Howdy,
> > >
> > > As many of you are no doubt already aware, much work has been undertaken
> > > to make clang the default compiler for the src tree starting with
> > > 9.0-RELEASE. It is not 100% certain that this change will be made, but
> > > it's looking more likely every day.
> > >
> > > This raises an interesting question for how to deal with compiling ports
> > > after 9.0 is released. So far there are 2 main ideas for how to deal
> > > with this:
> > >
> > > 1. Fix all ports to compile with both gcc 4.2 (for RELENG_) and clang.
> > > 2. Adopt an official "ports compiler," which would likely be one of the
> > > gcc versions from the ports tree itself, and update all ports to work
> > > with it.
> > 3. Fix Clang to compile more ports
> Note that these 3 are not mutually exclusive. The clang developers have
> been very responsive on earlier bugs we found and they are usually fixed
> quickly, so I'm sure that if real bugs in clang are found they will be
> happy to hear about them. Fixing ports to work with both gcc and clang
> should also be a good target to reach for, but given the amount of ports
> this is unrealistic to be finished before 9.0 is released.
What will happen to ports in non-clang arches (sparc64, ia64) after 9.0R?
Room 2.6, Queen's Building
Mech Eng Dept
University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK
Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944
Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423
More information about the freebsd-ports