Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-29 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday, August 29, 2013 1:02:06 pm David Chisnall wrote: > On 29 Aug 2013, at 15:57, John Baldwin wrote: > To summarise the current issues: > > Our libstdc++ is ancient. It supports C++98 well, it kind-of supports C++03. It doesn't support C++11 at all and never will, nor does it support

Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-29 Thread Warner Losh
On Aug 29, 2013, at 11:02 AM, David Chisnall wrote: > On 29 Aug 2013, at 15:57, John Baldwin wrote: > >> I have not seen any convincing >> argument as to why leaving GCC in the base for 10.x impedes anything. >> Because clang isn't sufficient for so many non-x86 platforms we can't >> really st

Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-29 Thread David Chisnall
On 29 Aug 2013, at 15:57, John Baldwin wrote: > I have not seen any convincing > argument as to why leaving GCC in the base for 10.x impedes anything. > Because clang isn't sufficient for so many non-x86 platforms we can't > really start using clang-specific features yet anyway. Apparently I h

Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-29 Thread Warner Losh
On Aug 25, 2013, at 8:21 AM, Ian Lepore wrote: > On Sat, 2013-08-24 at 23:44 +0100, David Chisnall wrote: >> On 24 Aug 2013, at 23:42, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: >> >>> And i found PR about clang and mplayer: ports/176272 >>> This PR contains log with build error log. >> >> Please file clang bu

Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-29 Thread Warner Losh
On Aug 29, 2013, at 8:57 AM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Saturday, August 24, 2013 7:19:22 am David Chisnall wrote: >> On 24 Aug 2013, at 11:30, "Sam Fourman Jr." wrote: >> >>> So I vote, let's not give ourselves the burden of "lugging" dead weight in >>> base >>> for another 5 years. (in 2017 do

Re: patch to add AES intrinsics to gcc

2013-08-29 Thread Warner Losh
On Aug 27, 2013, at 8:46 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > On 08/25/13 18:41, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >> On Fri, 23 Aug 2013, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote: >>> I object. Many ports that compiles perfectly on gcc 4.2.1 can't be >>> compiled with lang/gcc. I checked this once and the number of ports >>> tha

Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-29 Thread John Baldwin
On Saturday, August 24, 2013 7:19:22 am David Chisnall wrote: > On 24 Aug 2013, at 11:30, "Sam Fourman Jr." wrote: > > > So I vote, let's not give ourselves the burden of "lugging" dead weight in > > base > > for another 5 years. (in 2017 do we still want to be worrying about gcc in > > base?) >