On 01/25/2013 15:44, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
...
I am really tired of the constant struggle against the consumation of
the FreeBSD as the test-bed for the pre-alpha quality software. E.g.,
are we fine with broken C++ runtime in 9 ?
The libstdc++ issue is really REALLY worrying.
I would prefer if the hack to attempt using libstdc++ as a filter
library were reverted altogether in 9.x.
I had a lots of stress with that issue as some people pointed at
my libstdc++ updates as possible root cause. I felt some natural
relief when the real cause was found but I certainly wonder why
the change was made in 9.x though since it's clear that codebase
will not be migrated to libc++.
You were finger-pointed due to the rule 'blame the last committer
from the VCS log'. Even less so, you were asked about it because
you probably knew most about possible cause.
Oh, I was finger-pointed quite long ago, but I didn't find the
issue until you also fingerpointed so retroactively
fingerpointing was clearly the right thing to do. It was
nevertheless stressful as this is a pretty critical issue.
C++ is (partially) broken in a stable release!
I am not worried about the bug itself, which needs a proper
identification and fixing. I am indeed wery disappointed regarding the
attitude of the person who introduced the bug. Reverting the split may
be the best action in my opinion. Both in head and stable.
I am aware a fix is being worked on. I think that as long as
the default compiler/C++ library works it is OK to make things
easier for other compilers. I am OK with having that change in
-current but for 9.x it is simply unacceptable.
Pedro.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-toolchain-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
