> <http://clang.debian.net/>
Not much more than using two different compilers to get different warnings and expose different bugs. > - If using GCC, things may fail because Debian packages may rely on > Clang successful builds Any citation for clang being used on other architectures supported by Debian? Debian already handles bugs specific to some non-x86 architectures, they would do the same with issues specific to a compiler used only for them. > Again, this is theory at the moment, but I'd like you to take a moment > to think about it and maybe discuss what would/should be done in such a > case. Better think and brainstorm early, and be ready for something > like this, than be surprised later (e.g. making a huge Clang-built > archive build with GCC may be non-trivial, like the work done by those > people for the debian clang project). gNewSense had a good technical reason to rebuild all its software on mipsel: a CPU bug on Loongson 2F made programs built without a special assembler option hang the machine in some cases. This wasn't done, while there was no need for any code changes: the same compiler would be used, passing only one additional option which doesn't affect what code is supported. What a non-compiler developer who doesn't maintain a distro can do to support GCC here? Other than use in their programs features missing in clang like OpenMP.
pgpJYuHTNEjIG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ gNewSense-users mailing list gNewSense-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users
