Re: Ports with modern compilers
Hi-- On Jan 12, 2012, at 8:53 PM, Dmitry Sarkisov wrote: > Hello list, I'd hope that you are reading the list; as your address bounces: Begin forwarded message: > From: postmas...@mac.com > Date: January 12, 2012 9:07:37 PM PST > To: cswi...@mac.com > Subject: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed > > This report relates to a message you sent with the following header fields: > > Message-id: <467d6fa8-f0fa-45b3-b367-20fe9ad64...@mac.com> > Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 21:07:05 -0800 > From: Chuck Swiger > To: Dmitry Sarkisov > Subject: Re: Ports with modern compilers > > Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients: > > Recipient address: ait_ml...@rocc.ru > Reason: Remote SMTP server has rejected address > Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.7.1 ... Access denied > Remote system: dns;mail.rocc.ru (TCP|17.148.16.97|53739|194.84.224.171|25) > (mail.rocc.ru ESMTP [peer1]; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 09:07:27 +0400 [MSK];) > > Original-envelope-id: 0lxq00ais0vuw...@asmtp022.mac.com > Reporting-MTA: dns;asmtp022-bge351000.mac.com (tcp-daemon) > Arrival-date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 05:07:06 + (GMT) > > Original-recipient: rfc822;ait_ml...@rocc.ru > Final-recipient: rfc822;ait_ml...@rocc.ru > Action: failed > Status: 5.7.1 (Remote SMTP server has rejected address) > Remote-MTA: dns;mail.rocc.ru (TCP|17.148.16.97|53739|194.84.224.171|25) > (mail.rocc.ru ESMTP [peer1]; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 09:07:27 +0400 [MSK];) > Diagnostic-code: smtp;550 5.7.1 ... Access denied ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Ports with modern compilers
On Jan 12, 2012, at 8:53 PM, Dmitry Sarkisov wrote: > Hello list, > > I'd like to try building my ports with features and optimizations modern > complers provide. > A couple of q. here: > > 1. What's the safest (less painful) way to go - build with fresh gcc or > clang/llvm? For portable code, there shouldn't be much difference in terms of getting a working result. Clang tries to have better diagnostics than gcc; gcc has been around for a lot longer, and is much more likely to work with less-portable code due to GNU'isms. > 2. Is it ok to build new ports with new compiler, while already having a > bunch of them build with default gcc version 4.2.1? Yes. A more complete answer would be mostly, so long as nobody has changed C++ symbol mangling or a host of other details. Have fun, but don't expect too much benefit from recompiling things with a newer compiler. Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Ports with modern compilers
Hello list, I'd like to try building my ports with features and optimizations modern complers provide. A couple of q. here: 1. What's the safest (less painful) way to go - build with fresh gcc or clang/llvm? 2. Is it ok to build new ports with new compiler, while already having a bunch of them build with default gcc version 4.2.1? TIA -- Best wishes, Dmitry Sarkisov <--\ <---+-- <--/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
