Roman Divacky wrote:
Hi,
I would like to propose to integrate clang/LLVM into FreeBSD HEAD
in the near future (days, not weeks).
clang/LLVM is a C/C++/ObjC compiler (framework) which aims to possibly
replace gcc. It is BSDL-like licensed. The sources are ~45MB (the
svn checkout is 97MB). Clang/
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Garrett Cooper wrote:
I personally would much rather have the glue in place to switch between
compilers and have things default to the base version of gcc than just
magically switch the compiler over to clang.
But I like my bikesheds painted gray.
Calling that a bikeshe
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 10:46:54AM +1000, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 06/01/10 09:25, James R. Van Artsdalen wrote:
> [snip interesting history]
>
> >I do suggest modifying the FreeBSD build process so that uname -a shows
> >the compiler and its version for both the kernel and userland.
>
> Read
Brooks Davis writes:
> http://wiki.freebsd.org/201005ToolchainSummitSummary
"No new functionality that requires clang/llvm."
How about "No new functionality with non-trivial incompatibilities with
clang/llvm"?
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 06:01:03PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 03:52:27PM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> > Matthew Seaman wrote:
> >> Presumably the import of clang to the base does
> >> not mean the immediate removal of gcc.
> >
> > Of course not.
> >
> > I'm not part of c
On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 12:28:06 +0300, Lars Engels wrote:
It would be useful to exclude clang or gcc from the build manually.
You'd either have to fix a lot of ports or install gcc from ports
anyway. Excluding gcc isn't too useful at the moment, but I see how
that could be used in the future, onc
On 31 May 2010, at 11:56, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> My main concern is the usefulness of HEAD for routine bug-fixing process.
>
> The proposed merge makes it relatively easy for users to start compiling
> the system with CLang. Our HEAD userbase is one of the most valuable
> project asset to ensure
I'm a bit disappointed in the polemical nature of some of the comments
in this thread. I think we're all better off because of the existence
of the FSF and their affiliates, and of a body of useful software
under the (L)GPL, even if we prefer another license. No one has
forced us to use the work
On 28 May 2010, at 23:03, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 05/28/10 13:18, Doug Barton wrote:
>> I am trying to update -current in order to try kib's patch for the
>> nvidia driver, and the wpi driver won't establish a connection. I'm
>> using r207134 right now without any problems, but that's a long time
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
On Apr 2, 2009, at 6:35 PM, Tai-hwa Liang wrote:
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
Can you dump the first 2 sectors of slice 3 and
send it to me:
dd if=/dev/ad0s3 of=/tmp/dump.dd count=2 bs=512
*snip*
01b0 00 00 00 00 00 f2 0
Den 01/06/2010 kl. 12.19 skrev b. f.:
>
> Also, others have announced that they are running regression tests on
> systems built with clang. Would it be possible to set up some
> regularly scheduled tests to uncover possible problems, if this hasn't
> been done already?
As far as I know, regressi
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 15:27:24 +0200
Erik Cederstrand wrote:
> There's a collection of tests in src/tools/regression which can be
> run by installing devel/p5-Test-Harness. It does seem like the tests
> are in a sorry state, as an insane amount of tests are failing for me:
I get quite a different r
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 12:18:41PM +0200, Alban Hertroys wrote:
>
> Compiler bugs in gcc are probably just as hard to find as
> compiler bugs in clang, but if you have multiple compilers
> at your disposal you can determine that you're probably
> looking at a compiler bug instead of a FreeBSD bug.
On 6/1/2010 3:38 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> This is unsufficient. What could work is if clang provided some common
> symbol into all .o files generated by it, e.g. __clang_compiled. And
> then kernel considered tainted with corresponding banner printed when
> weak reference to that symbol is reso
Kostik Belousov writes:
> I do not object to a single point in your message. On the other hand, all
> said could be labeled as distilled propaganda.
Perhaps, but...
> [...] This immediately makes the bug reports against HEAD almost
> useless, since level of demotivation when looking at the bug
Attilio Rao writes:
> I really would like to see CLANG more integrated with FreeBSD only
> when there are 0 or similar (well-known, already analyzed, listed
> somewhere, etc.) bugs by the compiler [...]
Does this means you're planning to remove GCC, since it has tons of
known bugs?
DES
--
Dag-E
On Monday 31 May 2010 6:44:07 am Scott Long wrote:
> On May 31, 2010, at 3:08 AM, Ivan Voras wrote:
> > On 05/31/10 02:25, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> >> On Mon, 31 May 2010, Ivan Voras wrote:
> >>
> >>> Shouldn't SU+J be visible in the output of "mount" somehow? I've just
> >>> enabled it on a root f
On Saturday 29 May 2010 10:55:41 pm Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 02:48:13AM +0800, datastream datastream.freecity
wrote:
> > > http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=150719
> > NVIDIA-FreeBSD-x86_64-195.36.24 with r208117 in my T61 laptop works well.
>
> Hi,
>
> I
On Sunday 30 May 2010 11:06:22 am Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 06:30:35PM +0400, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Not long ago, POSIX semaphores support was enabled by default as it's
> > becoming more widely used, by e.g. firefox. However, the support
> > for these is s
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 11:15:26AM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote:
> Brooks Davis writes:
> > http://wiki.freebsd.org/201005ToolchainSummitSummary
>
> "No new functionality that requires clang/llvm."
>
> How about "No new functionality with non-trivial incompatibilities with
> clang/llvm"?
T
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, John Baldwin wrote:
MNT_* flags need to be deprecated, and the attributes passed in both
directions as key-value pairs. I don't know if anyone else has thought
about this and what it means for backwards compatibility.
My understanding of nmount() is that that is what it
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Brooks Davis wrote:
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 11:15:26AM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote:
Brooks Davis writes:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/201005ToolchainSummitSummary
"No new functionality that requires clang/llvm."
How about "No new functionality with non-trivial incompa
On May 31, 2010, at 3:57 AM, Tai-hwa Liang wrote:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_boot_record says that there may
> be another boot loader inside 0x0 ~ 0x1bd. If that's the case, I'm
> wondering if there is any disadvantage to disable the checksumming
> against 0x60 ~ 0x1b5?
The inte
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 11:41:09AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Sunday 30 May 2010 11:06:22 am Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 06:30:35PM +0400, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Not long ago, POSIX semaphores support was enabled by default as it's
> > > becoming
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 11:23:32AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 11:15:26AM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote:
> > Brooks Davis writes:
> > > http://wiki.freebsd.org/201005ToolchainSummitSummary
> >
> > "No new functionality that requires clang/llvm."
> >
> > How about "No
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 1:05:26 pm Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 11:41:09AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 May 2010 11:06:22 am Kostik Belousov wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 06:30:35PM +0400, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > Not long ago, P
On 01.06.2010 16:55, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Attilio Rao writes:
>> I really would like to see CLANG more integrated with FreeBSD only
>> when there are 0 or similar (well-known, already analyzed, listed
>> somewhere, etc.) bugs by the compiler [...]
>
> Does this means you're planning to re
Hi.
Just after upgrade from 7.2-p5 to 7.3-p1 I've got periodic panics on my
router (after about a hour uptime).
Unread portion of the kernel message buffer:
Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
cpuid = 2; apic id = 06
fault virtual address = 0xc
fault code = supervis
On 01.06.2010 20:57, Vanessa Kraus wrote:
> It's exciting that there may soon be an option other than gcc for
> FreeBSD. However I have a few questions. Is there going to be a system
> in place that will allow port maintainers to say "hey this port is now
> built successfully with Clang" or "hey
On May 31, 2010, at 12:52 AM, Roman Divacky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose to integrate clang/LLVM into FreeBSD HEAD
> in the near future (days, not weeks).
*nod of approval*
--
Marcel Moolenaar
xcl...@mac.com
___
freebsd-current@freebs
Roman Divacky writes:
> I would like to propose to integrate clang/LLVM into FreeBSD HEAD
> in the near future (days, not weeks).
+1
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
Hi.
Just after upgrade from 7.2-p5 to 7.3-p1 I've got periodic panics on my
router (after about a hour uptime).
...
Any ideas?
Are you using IPsec?
/bz
--
Bjoern A. Zeeb I will let you know once I escaped from my bird cage
and learnt to f
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 04:44:07AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
> MNT_* flags need to be deprecated, and the attributes passed in both
> directions as key-value pairs. I don't know if anyone else has thought about
> this and what it means for backwards compatibility.
>
> Scott
Hi,
I've thought a
* Kostik Belousov (kostik...@gmail.com) wrote:
I've tried the second patch, it works fine. It would be very nice to see
it in 8.1, thanks.
--
Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D
amd...@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amd...@jabber.ruhttp://www.amdmi3.ru
Hi guys. I have a device[1] that is recognized on Linux by the generic
CDC-ACM driver and I'm trying to do the same on FreeBSD current with
umodem (4). But, as you can see, I had no success:
Jun 1 20:00:54 BARAD-DUR kernel: uhub_reattach_port: port 1 reset
failed, error=USB_ERR_TIMEOUT
Jun 1 20:
FWIW, I support the import.
I don't think GCC is as bad as other people think it is, but I also have
been gravely concerned of the the reduction of toolchains down close to
one in our business. That in and of itself warrants supporting any
viable alternative.
_
On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 23:36:25 +0200 Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Roman Divacky writes:
> > I would like to propose to integrate clang/LLVM into FreeBSD HEAD
> > in the near future (days, not weeks).
> +1
+1
--
WBR, Boris Samorodov (bsam)
Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Interne
37 matches
Mail list logo
