clang tautology

[Dewayne Geraghty]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-stable at freebsd.org 
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-stable at freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Seaman
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 May 2012 5:33 PM
> To: Randy Bush
> Cc: FreeBSD Stable
> Subject: Re: clang tautology
> 
> On 29/05/2012 04:47, Randy Bush wrote:
> > is the clang build for releng_9 for amd64 in good enough 
> shape that i 
> > can simply
> >   csup
> >   hack make.conf
> >   make buildworld
> >   make kernel
> >   boot single
> >   make installworld
> >   mergemaster -cviFU
> >   reboot
> > 
> > as if life was normal?
> 
> Pace Doug's comments on how to use mergemaster, this works 
> for me.  I run my main server compiled with clang.  However, 
> it isn't under any sort of load and I haven't done any sort 
> of performance analysis so I don't know if I'd consider clang 
> on a high performance server at the moment.
> 
> Most ports compile very well using clang, but there are 
> exceptions.  Not so many though as to preclude using clang as 
> the default compiler for ports.
> 
> 	Cheers,
> 
> 	Matthew
> 
> --
> Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
> PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey
> 
> 
> 

Mark Linimon is monitoring the status of ports and clang at 
http://blog.vx.sk/archives/25-FreeBSD-Compiler-Benchmark-gcc-base-vs-gcc-po
rts-vs-clang.html
Which might save you some work.

FYI: This is a little dated and predates the recently committed clang v3.1
http://blog.vx.sk/archives/25-FreeBSD-Compiler-Benchmark-gcc-base-vs-gcc-po
rts-vs-clang.html

Regards, Dewayne.