Hello, John. You wrote 8 февраля 2014 г., 3:39:37: >>>> And it seems, that most of USE_GCC-equipped ports pull all this development >>>> toolkit for nothing! >> DA> Well, some ports can be more or less difficult to get building with >> DA> clang. So depending on whether the maintainer(s) wish to choose the way >> DA> of least resistance, they will sometimes decide to set USE_GCC. >> I'm not speaking about BUILD. I'm speaking about RUN. Why do I need >> compiler, >> assembler, linker & Ko to run pre-build software?
JM> dynamically linked libraries. JM> libcstd++ JM> libgfortran JM> libquadmath JM> libssp JM> libgcc_s JM> etc,etc 90% of USE_GCC-ports don't use libgrotran & libquadmath. Many of them doesn;t use libstdc++. virtualbox-ose-additions DOESN'T USAE ANY OF THESE LIBRARIES! And I think, it is not unique in this regard! And, of course, 99.9% of them doesn't use Java! JM> Ah, yes it is. See above. JM> GCC is built with GAS. It needs the GAS that it's configured with. But all these ports, which uses only libgcc_s and/or libstdc++ don't. You try to explain why it is as it is now, from purely formal, technical point of view. I know, thank you. What It try to say, that now, when we have binary packages (thank you, everybody, who make it possible!) and we don't have gcc in base on 10/CURRENT (and old gcc on older systems), we BADLY NEED way not to pull 0.5G of dependencies with any package, which was build with gcc! >> in case of USE_GCC, as libgcc.so + libstdc++.so is a tiiiiiiny fraction of >> full >> binutils + gcc package, and on non-developers system there is no need to >> have 0.5G of toolchain only because some software were build by this >> tooclahin on our build cluster! >> And I have feeling, that right now many cases of USE_GCC=any could be >> replaced with USE_GCC=any:build and some "magic" to link with >> libgcc/libstdc++ statically. Without any modularization of packages and >> pkgng support. JM> My feeling is that this isn't correct. There are "-static-libgcc" and "-static-libstdc++" flags for gcc... What does they mean? I understand, that it is not for EACH port, but, maybe, for most of them they are Ok? -- // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <l...@freebsd.org> _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
