Hi;
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Jiri Slaby
On 11/17/2010 09:52 PM, İsmail Dönmez wrote:
Hi;
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Jiri Slaby
wrote: You beat me to it. My plan was to compile whole factory with clang aka BSD.
It's a nonsense to me until you have numbers that support the idea that llvm-compiled stuff is faster. Do we have some already?
I am not interested in the speed, yet. clang is a better programmer compiler, better warnings is love at first sight. I just want to make sure it compiles whole stack of Linux applications.
Hmm, I would start with the base system. And after I'm sure it is compiled OK (IOW it _works_, i.e. runs most of the time), I would continue with the rest. I bet on it will miscompile any obscure code in base system packages which will be hard to debug otherwise.
Yes I'd do that. Correctly compiling base is a must.
But... please package 2.9 svn instead of 2.8 because SVN has important fixes for compiling
Is llvm-gcc always available for the latest svn? clang is unusable for many of GNU C sources because it still supports only a subset of GNU C.
If you refer to a specific program not compiling, I'll make sure its reported so it'll be fixed sooner or later. llvm community managed to fix lots of gcc compatibility bugs.
I was thinking about kernel, but it's more general. clang doesn't support all of GNU C (local labels for instance).
Google seems to be working on better ELF/Linux support, I'll check the LLVM bugzilla for this particular problem.
Further llvm-ld is painfully slow for thousands of objects for some time already (bug 6355) -- like incremental linking.
Will check that. Thanks! Regards, ismail -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org