t #
I paste the last lines of compile errors:
/../gcc-4.6.3/libgfortran/../gcc -I../.././../gcc-4.6.3/libgfortran/../gcc/confi
g -I../.././../gcc-4.6.3/libgfortran/../libquadmath -I../.././gcc -D_GNU_SOURCE
-std=gnu99 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition
-Wextra -
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 03:44:43PM -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote:
Hi Robert,
( Sorry for my before email, my before email is an error of apropiate
thread email )
> > Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 21:07:59 +0200
> > Subject: Re: can't compile lang/gcc port
> > From: Xavier
> >
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:31:11PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
Hi Roland,
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:07:59PM +0200, Xavier wrote:
> > >
> > > There is probably a compiler error somewhere before the lines that you
> > > posted.
> > > Can you show a little bit more?
> > >
> >
> > I don't show mor
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:31:11PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
Hi Roland,
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:07:59PM +0200, Xavier wrote:
> > >
> > > There is probably a compiler error somewhere before the lines that you
> > > posted.
> > > Can you show a little bit more?
> > >
> >
> > I don't show mor
> Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 21:07:59 +0200
> Subject: Re: can't compile lang/gcc port
> From: Xavier
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
>
> Hi Roland,
>
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:59:26PM +0200, Xavier wrote:
> > > Hi
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:07:59PM +0200, Xavier wrote:
> >
> > There is probably a compiler error somewhere before the lines that you
> > posted.
> > Can you show a little bit more?
> >
>
> I don't show more lines because the log is very long for paste here.
>
> I can send directly to your priv
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
Hi Roland,
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:59:26PM +0200, Xavier wrote:
> > Hi to all,
> >
> > I can't compile lang/gcc port.
> >
> > The last lines of error:
>
> Unfortunately the real err
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:59:26PM +0200, Xavier wrote:
> Hi to all,
>
> I can't compile lang/gcc port.
>
> The last lines of error:
Unfortunately the real error happens _above_ the lines that you showed.
> else \
> exit 1; \
> fi; \
&g
Hi to all,
I can't compile lang/gcc port.
The last lines of error:
else \
exit 1; \
fi; \
else true; \
fi; \
fi; \
done; \
fi
gmake[5]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/lang/gcc/work/build/i386-portbld-freebsd
9.1/libstdc++-v3'
gmake[4
Alexandre writes:
> > Before the installation of clang and the default system
> > compiler, "make buildworld" ended with a nice little banner announcing
> > the fact and the time the build completed.
> > After, it ends like this:
>
> Your mail has been truncated. Could you please send us
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Robert Huff wrote:
>
>
> Before the installation of clang and the default system
> compiler, "make buildworld" ended with a nice little banner announcing
> the fact and the time the build completed.
> After, it ends like this:
>
> _
Before the installation of clang and the default system
compiler, "make buildworld" ended with a nice little banner announcing
the fact and the time the build completed.
After, it ends like this:
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
h
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 09:32:38AM +0200, Ivailo Tanusheff wrote:
Hi Ivailo,
>Hi,
>I think you should update your ports tree :)
Yes, your solution work.
Thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/li
On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 02:17:46PM +0100, Fleuriot Damien wrote:
Hi Fleuriot,
>
> On Jan 7, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Xavier wrote:
>
> > Hi to all,
> >
> > I try compile lang/gcc port but it stopped with required 'file to patch':
> >
> > root@casa:/u
Hi,
I think you should update your ports tree :)
Regards,
Ivailo Tanusheff
Xavier
Sent by: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
07.01.2013 15:15
To
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
cc
Subject
problem to compile lang/gcc
Hi to all,
I try compile lang/gcc port but it stopped with
On Jan 7, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Xavier wrote:
> Hi to all,
>
> I try compile lang/gcc port but it stopped with required 'file to patch':
>
> root@casa:/usr/ports/lang/gcc # make
> Making GCC 4.6.3 for i386-portbld-freebsd9.1 [c,c++,objc,fortran,java]
> ===>
If it would be truly about removing GPLv3 code that hurts, replacing
libstdc++ would be first thing to do.
I assume you mean like the new libc++?
http://wiki.freebsd.org/NewC%2B%2BStack
yes. this is actually GREAT MOVE!
even if it's slower, object oriented languages are not about speed anyway.
On 25/06/2012 13:56, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>
> C++ libraries can be limiting, but... wasn't replaced.
>
> If it would be truly about removing GPLv3 code that hurts, replacing
> libstdc++ would be first thing to do.
I assume you mean like the new libc++?
http://wiki.freebsd.org/NewC%2B%2BStack
>
programming involves many of the classic trade-offs in programming: dynamic
features add flexibility, static features add speed and type checking."
My Note: please keep in mind we are talking about language used for writing
clang, a compiler tool.
So, Objective-C has disadvantage with regard
Jakub Lach mailplus.pl> writes:
>
> > I am more concerned about an aspect of the language the clang tools are
> > written in, namely the use of object-oriented paradigm of c++ (it is a
> > phony
> > paradigm, one that does not exist in nature or reality, which explains
> > the failure rate of C+
> I am more concerned about an aspect of the language the clang tools are
> written in, namely the use of object-oriented paradigm of c++ (it is a
> phony
> paradigm, one that does not exist in nature or reality, which explains
> the failure rate of C++ OO projects historically and current usage
>
Chad Perrin apotheon.com> writes:
>
> Anyway, switching from GCC to Clang has essentially nothing to do with
> the kinds of problems we increasingly see in the Linux world. In fact,
> one of the biggest problems in the Linux world is the fact that GNU
> projects have a tend
underway to make sure the base system will compile cleanly with both
Clang and GCC 4.2+, so I think you're just making up complaints here.
Someone (other than Wojciech Puchar, who would just be talking out of his
once again personal attacks from unhappy childs.
ass) correct me i
Chad Perrin wrote:
Someone in this extended discussion mentioned that there are efforts
underway to make sure the base system will compile cleanly with both
Clang and GCC 4.2+, so I think you're just making up complaints here.
Someone (other than Wojciech Puchar, who would just be talking o
gt; > - have some useful functionality like softdep journalling, but risky.
> > Still - forcing full check reveals some inconsistencies now and then.
> >
> > FreeBSD 10 will unlikely be better, but for sure slower unless you will
> > force gcc build that MAYBE will work. possib
force gcc build that MAYBE will work. possibly not.
My experience with NetBSD suggests you may be right there, but Linux?
After commercial support got too much about directing decisions, NetBSD
got very quickly useless.
I'll have to build a new Linux installation and see for m
e similar performance at most
> - have some improvement and important functionality like TRIM support.
> - have some useful functionality like softdep journalling, but risky.
> Still - forcing full check reveals some inconsistencies now and then.
> FreeBSD 10 will unlikely be bette
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
> i would recommend you to take more care about yourself, and not me.
You are not in the right position to give advice, young man.
--
chs,
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://l
21.06.2012 02:26, Wojciech Puchar пишет:
>>> the answer.
>>
>> I'll try to help out, here.
>>
>> Christer Solskogen: I think the reason that is so very important to
>> Wojciech Puchar is the fact that he is incapable of imagining:
>>
>> 1. other concerns that might apply
>>
>> 2. that things appear
the answer.
I'll try to help out, here.
Christer Solskogen: I think the reason that is so very important to
Wojciech Puchar is the fact that he is incapable of imagining:
1. other concerns that might apply
2. that things appear highly likely to change
3. that a negligible performance differe
nd I'm too lazy to check]
>>>>> Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the
>>>>> CLANG project?
>>>> because we already have great compiler - GCC. In spite of using GPL
>>>> licence.
>>> GCC performs well, but it
;>> Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the
> >>> CLANG project?
> >>
> >> because we already have great compiler - GCC. In spite of using GPL
> >> licence.
> >
> > GCC performs well, but it is a very messy undocume
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:07:09PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > wrote:
> >>Will i be able to compile FreeBSD base system with gcc after some time?
> >>not sure.
> >
> >Why is that so important for you?
> if you would read even less than carefully the top
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Will i be able to compile FreeBSD base system with gcc after some time?
>>> not sure.
>>
>>
>> Why is that so important for you?
>
> if you would read even less t
wrote:
Will i be able to compile FreeBSD base system with gcc after some time?
not sure.
Why is that so important for you?
if you would read even less than carefully the topic you will get the
answer.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 7:18 AM, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
> Will i be able to compile FreeBSD base system with gcc after some time?
> not sure.
Why is that so important for you?
--
chs,
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing lis
I wish that or something like that were true, but pcc is dead even in
OpenBSD packages/ports. There was just some discussion on misc@
I am hoping for the day gcc is only used on Linux and many free compilers
are used everywhere else.
me too. but first we need to have Free compiler that would be
> Besides, NetBSD and OpenBSD has already selected and using pcc now. And
> they are fine with that one.
I wish that or something like that were true, but pcc is dead even in
OpenBSD packages/ports. There was just some discussion on misc@
I am hoping for the day gcc is only used on Lin
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 02:16:43PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >speed estimates.
>
> there are a difference between speed estimate and actual speed - and
> i talk about the latter only.
You're talking about poorly managed benchmarks that are imprecise and
prone to fluctuation, applying only to
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:14:09PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >
> >And why you think it's not better then gcc?
>
> because - as you already should know - test shows otherwise.
You just ignored everything Volodymyr Kostyrko said about the other
factors that are also i
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:09:23AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >1. gcc will still be available through the ports system.
>
> As well as clang is available in ports. not an argument.
No, it's not an argument all by itself. It's *part* of an argument.
> >
>
ment in performance and quality.
>
>
> FreeBSD 9 as for now:
>
> - have similar performance at most
> - have some improvement and important functionality like TRIM support.
> - have some useful functionality like softdep journalling, but
> risky. Still - forcing full
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 06:46:20AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >
> >>How about leaving politics and getting back to technical grounds?
> >
> >what is the problem as long as gcc is in the ports tree?
>
> what is a problem as clang is in the ports tree?
I can
20.06.2012 18:47, Mark Felder пишет:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:43:14 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
> wrote:
>
>>> Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the
>>> CLANG project?
>>
>> because we already have great compiler - GCC. In spite of usin
trying to
figure out what the hell the previous thousands of programmers before
me tried to do :)
It could be risky to switch to clang, but if the decision proves
wrong, we can always go back to GPL2 gcc, evaluate the possibility of
GPL3 gcc or even use another compiler. Besides, it seems to me ve
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:43:14 -0500, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the CLANG
project?
because we already have great compiler - GCC. In spite of using GPL
licence.
GCC performs well, but it is a very messy undocumented codebase which
Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the CLANG
project?
because we already have great compiler - GCC. In spite of using GPL
licence.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
Wojciech,
Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the CLANG
project?
1. Find simple programs with severe performance issues
2. Report to the CLANG developers
3. They fix, tweak, and tune the compiler
4. FreeBSD imports latest release
5. Everybody wins
speed estimates.
there are a difference between speed estimate and actual speed - and i
talk about the latter only.
Besides, NetBSD and OpenBSD has already selected and using pcc now. And they
are fine with that one.
their problem.
___
freebsd-que
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
And why you think it's not better then gcc?
because - as you already should know - test shows otherwise.
Test show only that clang-compiled binaries are still subject for
improvement. It doesn't show how strict and clear this binary is.
As well as FreeB
at most
- have some improvement and important functionality like TRIM support.
- have some useful functionality like softdep journalling, but risky.
Still - forcing full check reveals some inconsistencies now and then.
FreeBSD 10 will unlikely be better, but for sure slower unless you will
force gcc b
any
particular user -- be it 'Wojceich' or _anyone_ else.
You admit you are 'not a developer'. That *you* don't see problems, is
irrelevant to whether those who _are_ developers do. Your perceptions
of problems, or the lack thereof, is similarly immaterial. Those who _
And why you think it's not better then gcc?
because - as you already should know - test shows otherwise.
As well as FreeBSD running predictable with gcc anyway.
Still theory and ideology.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
5. clang/llvm is more modular than gcc, although there are plans for
gcc to become as modular, it will take time.
Doesn't matter how it is written, but how it performs.
That's a hard one. I remember an error in gcc loop optimizer which makes
gcc produce SS
1. gcc will still be available through the ports system.
As well as clang is available in ports. not an argument.
2. The move to clang/llvm as a default compiler will reduce the amount
of GPL code in the base system, eventually reducing distribution
issues (especially for 3rd parties).
true
The answer is:
1. gcc will still be available through the ports system.
2. The move to clang/llvm as a default compiler will reduce the amount
of GPL code in the base system, eventually reducing distribution
issues (especially for 3rd parties).
3. clang/llvm provides better error and warning
Yes Wojciech, I can attempt an answer for you. Pay attention, this gets very
complex.
The decision to move to Clang was motivated by what is best for the project,
and not what is best for Wojciech.
still not stopped personal attacks (last part of last sentence) but lets
forget.
So please g
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 1:59 AM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>
> OK? Can you just answer that simple question clearly?
>
Yes Wojciech, I can attempt an answer for you. Pay attention, this gets
very complex.
The decision to move to Clang was motivated by what is best
ness above facts and FreeBSD
performance. And the facts are against clang.
BUT PLEASE stop offtopic explaining about secure boot problems and answer
one clear question:
What exactly GPLv3 have wrong that we can use gcc in longer term for
FreeBSD system?
OK? Can you just answer that simpl
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> Yes, Clang in general produces slower binaries than gcc. Is that in
>> dispute or something? Or is this just repetition in case we
>> didn't hear you the first time?
>&g
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 7:18 AM, Wojciech Puchar
wrote:
>> Yes, Clang in general produces slower binaries than gcc. Is that in
>> dispute or something? Or is this just repetition in case we
>> didn't hear you the first time?
>
>
> just yesterday i've heard l
Hi,
On Wednesday 20 June 2012 11:46:20 Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >> How about leaving politics and getting back to technical grounds?
> >
> > what is the problem as long as gcc is in the ports tree?
>
> what is a problem as clang is in the ports tree?
for the port? It
Yes, Clang in general produces slower binaries than gcc. Is that in dispute or
something? Or is this just repetition in case we
didn't hear you the first time?
just yesterday i've heard lots of otherwise claim.
Try thinking of the transition as a step back to take many ste
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Wojciech Puchar <
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> i tested your test program, and in that case, contrary to testing common
> unix programs, difference is far higher showing gcc superiority.
>
> i did this test with FreeBSD 9 supplied c
How about leaving politics and getting back to technical grounds?
what is the problem as long as gcc is in the ports tree?
what is a problem as clang is in the ports tree?
the problem is that these compilers are not 100% compatible and soon if
clang will be default it will be not just
Hi,
On Wednesday 20 June 2012 11:26:13 Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> How about leaving politics and getting back to technical grounds?
what is the problem as long as gcc is in the ports tree?
Erich
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
h
i tested your test program, and in that case, contrary to testing common
unix programs, difference is far higher showing gcc superiority.
i did this test with FreeBSD 9 supplied clang and FreeBSD 9 supplied gcc.
clearly shows that clang actually cannot do more agressive optimization
(that
Hi,
On Wednesday 21 March 2012 21:50:25 Martin McCormick wrote:
> I've got some code which I wrote about 6 or 8 years ago that
> apparently doesn't get along right now with FreeBSD9.0. In the
> problem code, there is a loop that uses fgets to read a line
> from a file. It runs properly until the 2
On 3/21/2012 10:50 AM, Martin McCormick wrote:
I've got some code which I wrote about 6 or 8 years ago that
apparently doesn't get along right now with FreeBSD9.0. In the
problem code, there is a loop that uses fgets to read a line
from a file. It runs properly until the 2708TH iteration and
then
Martin McCormick writes:
> I've got some code which I wrote about 6 or 8 years ago that
> apparently doesn't get along right now with FreeBSD9.0. In the
> problem code, there is a loop that uses fgets to read a line
> from a file. It runs properly until the 2708TH iteration and
> then it dum
Never mind. I may be back with another question, but I figured
out that it is not the input loop. I simply removed all the code
in the loop except for a variable that counts the number of
iterations and just ran thatand it read the entire file so the
problem is introduced when assigning values to v
I've got some code which I wrote about 6 or 8 years ago that
apparently doesn't get along right now with FreeBSD9.0. In the
problem code, there is a loop that uses fgets to read a line
from a file. It runs properly until the 2708TH iteration and
then it dumps core with a segmentation fault.
char s
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Artifex Maximus wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Absolutely not a flame war but would like to switch to clang in a
> > project. Project uses ncurses. gcc works well but the executable fails
> > when compil
Artifex Maximus wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Absolutely not a flame war but would like to switch to clang in a
> project. Project uses ncurses. gcc works well but the executable fails
> when compiled other than -O0. Then I think I should change to clang
> which will becomes the default c
Hello!
Absolutely not a flame war but would like to switch to clang in a
project. Project uses ncurses. gcc works well but the executable fails
when compiled other than -O0. Then I think I should change to clang
which will becomes the default compiler in FreeBSD. With clang at
linking time I got
On 1/23/2012 3:47 PM, Pierre-Luc Drouin wrote:
Hi,
I just "made" world and kernel using clang, but I noticed that ld is still
using the GNU ld. The page
http://wiki.freebsd.org/BuildingFreeBSDWithClangmentions using a
different linker that supports LTO optimisation. Is that
non-GNU linker part o
Hi,
I just "made" world and kernel using clang, but I noticed that ld is still
using the GNU ld. The page
http://wiki.freebsd.org/BuildingFreeBSDWithClangmentions using a
different linker that supports LTO optimisation. Is that
non-GNU linker part of FreeBSD 9?
Thanks!
___
Hi,
I try to play with GCD in FreeBSD. Compilation through clang is fine.
However when i use the gcc from base for code with dispatch_async i got
warning: implicit declaration of function 'dispatch_async'
The existing file /usr/local/include/dispatch/queue.h contains the
jyl_2006 writes:
> For some reason,I want to compile the source code of mozilla,so i can not
> use port.
Then you need to have more knowledge of what you're doing than the ports
system requires. It looks like it's the configure script that fails,
but you have shown very little of your problem a
> I decided to switch from portmaster to portupgrade and pkddb -F show many
> stale dependencies on gcc-4.4.5.20110503 (lang/gcc44).
>
> Do I need to put new dependencies to gcc-4.5.4.20110630 or something else,
> please?
> For portmaster I put IGNOREMI+ line and it works but I
Hi!
I decided to switch from portmaster to portupgrade and pkddb -F show many
stale dependencies on gcc-4.4.5.20110503 (lang/gcc44).
Do I need to put new dependencies to gcc-4.5.4.20110630 or something else,
please?
For portmaster I put IGNOREMI+ line and it works but I don't know how
;>
> writes:
>
> > Anyone who encounter this problem?
> > checking whether the complier (*gcc -L/usr/local/v6/lib*) works... no
> >
> > The gcc version is 4.2.1 20070719 .And if I complie a simple program such
> as
> > hello,world. It works well,but when I compile
jyl_2006 writes:
> Anyone who encounter this problem?
> checking whether the complier (*gcc -L/usr/local/v6/lib*) works... no
>
> The gcc version is 4.2.1 20070719 .And if I complie a simple program such as
> hello,world. It works well,but when I compile mozilla,it shows the pr
Anyone who encounter this problem?
checking whether the complier (*gcc -L/usr/local/v6/lib*) works... no
The gcc version is 4.2.1 20070719 .And if I complie a simple program such as
hello,world. It works well,but when I compile mozilla,it shows the problme?
Thanks in advance.
--
View this
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 06:03:07PM +0200, Eduardo wrote:
> At 17:19 31/03/2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> >> >What is FreeBSD c compiler?
> >> >Isn't it GCC?
> >>
> >> Now yes, but FreeBSD needs an iso c'99 compiler and source code is
&g
At 20:22 31/03/2011, Gary Dunn wrote:
Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
Me too. Am I wrong to think that installing a newer gcc could break
system or port building?
No, you must take care that newer gcc will be installed on
/usr/local/bin and not in /usr/bin, check this forum entry:
http
can.org/2010/schedule/events/175.en.html
Apple and some other companies made the switch from gcc to llvm some
years ago, in Apple case, because gnu/fsf forced to make all
objective-c compiler developed by Apple for gcc open source, because
gcc was GPL (http://www.informit.com/articles/article.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Gary Dunn wrote:
> Adam Vande More wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Gary Dunn wrote:
>>
>>> When will we bump the version of gcc? On my fresh 8.2 build it is
>>4.2.1.
>>> The ports tree has newer, up to 4.7.0
Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:37:53AM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:10:44PM -0500, Adam Vande More wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Gary Dunn
>wrote:
>> >
>> > > When will w
Adam Vande More wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Gary Dunn wrote:
>
>> When will we bump the version of gcc? On my fresh 8.2 build it is
>4.2.1.
>> The ports tree has newer, up to 4.7.0 dated 19 Mar 2011.
>>
>
>Probably never, as GPL 3 code isn't
At 17:19 31/03/2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> >What is FreeBSD c compiler?
> >Isn't it GCC?
>
> Now yes, but FreeBSD needs an iso c'99 compiler and source code is
> iso oriented, not gcc, afaik gcc hacks and code that only compiles on
> gcc can't be com
>>>>> "Anton" == Anton Shterenlikht writes:
Anton> Are you saying GCC doesn't comply with ISO standard(s)?
Welcome to the GNU World. First time here?
:-)
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
http://www.stonehenge
At 16:49 31/03/2011, you wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:37:53AM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:10:44PM -0500, Adam Vande More wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Gary Dunn wrote:
> >
> > > When will we bump the version of gcc
r 30, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Gary Dunn wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > When will we bump the version of gcc? On my fresh 8.2 build
> >it is 4.2.1.
> >> > > The ports tree has newer, up to 4.7.0 dated 19 Mar 2011.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:37:53AM -0400, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:10:44PM -0500, Adam Vande More wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Gary Dunn wrote:
> >
> > > When will we bump the version of gcc? On my fresh 8.2 build it is
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:10:44PM -0500, Adam Vande More wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Gary Dunn wrote:
>
> > When will we bump the version of gcc? On my fresh 8.2 build it is 4.2.1.
> > The ports tree has newer, up to 4.7.0 dated 19 Mar 2011.
> >
>
>
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Gary Dunn wrote:
> When will we bump the version of gcc? On my fresh 8.2 build it is 4.2.1.
> The ports tree has newer, up to 4.7.0 dated 19 Mar 2011.
>
Probably never, as GPL 3 code isn't allowed in the base system. There have
been some
When will we bump the version of gcc? On my fresh 8.2 build it is 4.2.1. The
ports tree has newer, up to 4.7.0 dated 19 Mar 2011.
--
Gary Dunn, Honolulu
Open Slate Project
http://openslate.org
http://www.facebook.com/garydunn808
http://e9erust.blogspot.com
Twitter @garydunn808
Sent from my
On Oct 28, 2010, at 3:34 PM, Arthur Barlow wrote:
> Yes, that's it. I'm running FBSD 8.1 and I check the ports with "pkg_version
> -vIL=" daily, and it seems there has been this almost
> constant version upgrade for the last couple of weeks. I use "portupgrade"
> to do my upgrades.
Hmm, update
t often (unless you are tracking
> -CURRENT), so you probably are asking about one of the lang/gcc ports...?
>
> --
> -Chuck
>
>
Yes, that's it. I'm running FBSD 8.1 and I check the ports with
"pkg_version -vIL=" daily, and it seems there has been this almost
1 - 100 of 557 matches
Mail list logo
