Hi Chris,

status can be found here - 
https://hg.openindiana.org/users/xenol/oi-build/file/1dcbf893845c/status

More or less around 60% of stuff compiles with GCC with minor changes (removing 
Studio related bits). 

Adam


On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:20 AM, Christopher Chan 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Just curious, is there a list of packages that need massaging to build with 
> gcc?
> 
> On Monday, January 28, 2013 07:42 AM, Adam Števko wrote:
>> Hi guys, 
>> 
>> I have just few things to say.
>> 
>> First of all, this thread was meant to get the code review for my set of 
>> patches and not trash talking about which version of GCC should be used. As 
>> OpenIndiana doesn't have userland fully buildable by GCC, I see no point in 
>> debating which version of GCC should be used. Once everything compiles with 
>> the version we currently have (gcc 4.4.4, not the one used for compiling 
>> illumos-gate), I will try to work on that as well. For now, the priority is 
>> to get rid of studio and have oi-build fully buildable by GCC. Does anyone 
>> think differently?
>> 
>> Secondly, I would like to ask people to stay out of this thread if it is not 
>> directly related to the code review. If you want to discuss other topics, 
>> please create new thread on the mailing list. I mean no offense to anyone, 
>> but let's stay focused on the code review.
>> 
>> Lastly, thanks to people who reviewed stuff. I will work on your comments 
>> tomorrow (later today) as I want to move with this stuff forward.
>> 
>> Thanks for understanding and cooperation. 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Adam
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 27, 2013, at 9:05 PM, Sašo Kiselkov <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 01/27/2013 02:57 PM, Luca De Pandis wrote:
>>>>> For practical purposes, the important
>>>>> thing is to get OI repos to build with *any* relatively recent free
>>>>> compiler (be it GCC or clang).
>>>> From GCC website:
>>>> 3.4.3 November 4, 2004 ---> (~8 years and 9 months ago)
>>>> 
>>>> It's not relatively recent. It's paleolithic, man.
>>> I mean no offense Luca, but you really need to read what I wrote, not
>>> what you *think* I wrote:
>>> 
>>> "I agree with Bayard here, the difference between using GCC 4.4.4 and
>>> 4.7 is largely academic at this point. For practical purposes, the
>>> important thing is to get OI repos to build with *any* relatively recent
>>> free compiler (be it GCC or clang)."
>>> 
>>> So I wasn't talking about GCC 3.4.3.
>>> 
>>>> The only possible workarounds are build a recent gcc version yourself or 
>>>> use 
>>>> SFEgcc package, but the last option is not a viable alternative if your 
>>>> CPU is 
>>>> not SSE2-capable.
>>> SSE2 was introduced in 2001 and almost every CPU sold since 2003
>>> includes them. We're talking 10+ years old CPUs. FFS, could we please
>>> move on?
>>> 
>>>> So, not every users are able to use that compiler/runtime.
>>> We're talking about hardware that is seriously stone-age.
>>> 
>>>> The questions that i asked are:
>>>> 1) Since OI has two default compilers (one for illumos development and one 
>>>> for 
>>>> the rest), are there technical reasons that push back oi devs to upgrade 
>>>> gcc?
>>>> 2) Would not it be better for all of us release OI with two compilers, one 
>>>> for 
>>>> Illumos development (4.4.4) and one for the rest (latest release)?
>>> Where are your webrevs for the new versions of GCC? Seriously people,
>>> you need to stop bickering and start contributing. I have no problem
>>> with using a newer GCC for userland - whatever, I'm do Illumos
>>> development anyway, so this discussion affects me only marginally. I'm
>>> just getting tired of the endless stream of armchair experts who will
>>> nonetheless sit with their arms folded waiting for somebody else to
>>> implement their brilliant ideas.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> --
>>> Saso
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> oi-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> oi-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> oi-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
oi-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev

Reply via email to