On 05/12/2017 18:51, Gregory Farnum wrote:
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 5-12-2017 17:40, Adam C. Emerson wrote:
On 05/12/2017, kefu chai wrote:
once all trusty testnodes are re-imaged with xenial, i will try to
remove the trusty build support on ceph/ceph-build. BTW, if we want to
use gcc-7 on xenial, which ships GCC 5.3, we can apply the same fix on
it also.
If we can get GCC-7 on Xenial and there's a way for people building
Ceph to get it without too much trouble, then I think we should use
GCC-7.
In general, so long as they are reasonably gettable on our target
operating systems, I think we ought to target the latest stable
release stream of GCC and Clang.
I was talking with Josh yesterday and he mentioned how newer C++
releases have a less stable ABI and we often need to ship out
libstdc++ with them. Would this change anything we care about?
(I, like, super don't care. But I also don't really know anything about it.)
"somebody" dropped the Clang word. :)
Dare I then suggest that some of the build be done against Clang whilest
building PRs also.
I think we'd all love this. Maybe somebody with a vested interest in
Clang working properly and recent experience mucking around with our
build systems will submit a PR? :p
Yeah, I know.... Put the code where your mouth is....
Uptill now I've avoided getting dragged into too much knowledge about
exactly this part. I'd be willing to deliver FreeBSD/Clang knowledge for
that. But unfortunately I do not have enough time to start digging into
this.
--WjW
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
