Building with gcc?

[Glen Barber]

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 01:59:03PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 25 Nov 2013, at 02:31, Glen Barber <gjb at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 05:28:05PM -0800, Matthew Fleming wrote:
> >> I'm trying to test a change to gcc, and I'd like to do a full
> >> buildworld/buildkernel using the gcc compiler.  So I added this to my
> >> /etc/src.conf (and make.conf, since I can't remember under which scenarios
> >> they're different):
> >> 
> >> WITHOUT_CLANG=YES
> >> WITH_GCC=YES
> >> WITH_GNUCXX=YES
> >> 
> >> and I started a buildworld.  It's currently building clang.
> >> 
> >> Why is it building clang?
> >> 
> > 
> > You also want WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC=YES.  I have no reasonable explanation
> > for why it is different.
> 
> WITHOUT_CLANG and WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC were decoupled in r256915 by brooks:
> 
> "Stop conflating WITHOUT_CLANG with WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC.  This allows
> bootstrapping a copy of clang without building clang for the base system
> which is useful for nanobsd and similar setups.  It's still probably
> wrong to conflate what is installed as /usr/bin/cc with the selection
> of a bootstrap compiler under WITH*_CLANG_IS_CC, but that's for another
> day."
> 
> I would still say that WITHOUT_CLANG implies that you cannot have clang
> as cc, so maybe it would be better to error out in this case?
> 

Yes, that is what I meant by not having a reasonable explanation why.
If WITHOUT_CLANG is set, WITHOUT_CLANG_IS_CC should (as it was before)
be implied.

Glen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/attachments/20131125/10a769dc/attachment.sig>