On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:33 AM, M. Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote: > In message: <20100531161713.ga60...@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, -Garrett _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
