On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:33 AM, M. Warner Losh <imp_at_bsdimp.com> wrote: > In message: <20100531161713.GA60782_at_freebsd.org> [...] > There's more context here too. To improve the support of various > architectures, we're planning on doing two things. First, we're > updating binutils to the latest gplv2 version. This will solve many > problems. There's some other plans in this area as well, but the > summary is basically integrating some important vendor patches. > Second, we're planning to have the ability to use an external, perhaps > vendor supplied, tool chain. You can kludge this together today, but > it is tedious and difficult. This in and of itself is an interesting prospect. Why would happen if one could drop in icc for instance :) (I realize that it's basically gcc-compatible, but can this be done today without a lot of rework and effort)? > : > b. Is the project drop these FreeBSD ports? or [...] > Part of the problem with this thread is that the whole, agreed plan > wasn't laid out at the first part of it, so people are freaking out > about what the plans are for the future. They were discussed and > first order agreement was reached at the tool chains summit. But part > of the agreement was to post the whole agreement so people know and > understand the various trade offs. > > I think that would go a long way towards answering the questions that > are being raised and to quell the visceral reaction that I've seen in > this thread.... +1 Thanks, -GarrettReceived on Mon May 31 2010 - 17:35:34 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:04 UTC