Hi Maciej, Am 15.03.2012 um 07:59 schrieb Maciej Bliziński: > Ben Walton wrote: >> Excerpts from Peter Bonivart's message of Sun Mar 11 19:21:30 -0400 2012: >>> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Ben Walton <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> I understand that performance of the binaries generated by studio >>>> used to be superior, but I don't know if that's still the >>>> case. Aside from this (possible) win for studio, what are some of >>>> the other reasons we've traditionally preferred it to gcc? >>> >>> I'd like to switch the _default_ compiler only. :) >> >> Yes, this is important. It was implicit in my mind, but it's good to >> be explicit. > > If we wanted to do this, we need to plan how to transition. If we > rebuild a C++ library sitting in /opt/csw/lib, we'll break all the > clients that are built with Studio. We probably don't want that. > > We need to find a way to automatically check which libraries are built > with Studio and which with GCC (by only looking at the binary and maybe > doing some pattern searches on symbols). This will allow us to assess > the situation better. If the target is to have GCC-built C++ libs in > /opt/csw/lib, it would have to look something like this:
What if something requires Sun Studio? (I have no example at hand, but it is thinkable for some more proprietary stuff) > 1. Identify all Studio C++ libs and their dependencies > 2. Build the GCC versions of these libs into /opt/csw/gxx > 3. Rebuild the dependencies using the libs in /opt/csw/gxx > 4. Move the Studio libs from /opt/csw/lib to /opt/csw/studio or remove > them altogether > 5. Rebuild the GCC libs into /opt/csw/lib > 6. Rebuild the dependencies > > It's not a trivial task. > > As an alternative, we could see if we can do a gradual migration, > meaning that once we rebuild something, we follow this path. We could > probably come up with a set of checks that would ensure the right order > of operations. But then we'd have a mix of Studio and GCC C++ libraries > in /opt/csw/lib, which could be royally confusing. > > Thoughts? I don't think it is a real gain. The current model allows building C code with the compiler of the maintainers choice (which is good IMHO), whereas C++ code needs to be compiled twice. While this is more work it is only needed for C++ projects which are a limited set. Additionally, I prefer Sun Studio because it is stricter and helps upstream to keep a portable codebase. Most upstream projects are indeed concerned about this. To summarize, I see a lot of work for the transition with little gain. We have probably more important things to do. Just my 0,02 € Best regards -- Dago -- "You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896 _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
