On 28 May 2016 at 14:30, Mark Millard <mar...@dsl-only.net> wrote:
> On 2016-May-28, at 12:03 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> hi,
>>
>> please don't patch the ports compiler assumptions about things like
>> this. We should be targeting
[snip]
hi,
please don't patch the ports compiler assumptions about things like
this. We should be targeting external toolchains on OSes (eg macosx)
where it may already generate freebsd binaries and as such we should
be calling the compiler/linker with all the flags it needs.
Having a patched
On 19 April 2015 at 02:10, Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote:
On 18 April 2015 at 11:12, Craig Rodrigues rodr...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hi,
After the latest commits by members of freebsd-toolchain@ ,
I have managed to compile latest CURRENT world and GENERIC
kernel on amd64 with an gcc
On 28 August 2014 10:34, Ed Schouten e...@80386.nl wrote:
On 28 August 2014 19:18, Steve Kargl s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu
wrote:
What it is the performance penalty (time and memory)? That is,
buildworld already takes a long time on my system because
of clang.
My gut feeling
You know, I could be a total jerk and say:
If you push gcc out to a port, and you have the 'external compiler'
toolchain support working correctly enough to build with this, why don't we
just push clang out to a port, and be done with it?
... just saying.
-adrian
Hi,
Please submit a PR and I'll fix the AR5210 code. I'll have to find an
AR5210 though to test it against though...
Adrian
On 3 November 2011 13:08, Dimitry Andric d...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 2011-11-03 20:03, Alexander Best wrote:
On Thu Nov 3 11, Dimitry Andric wrote:
On 2011-11-03
