On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 at 16:42, Przemek Klosowski <przemek.klosowski@xxxxxxxx> wrote: [..] > >> After which, I'm going to ask rel-eng to finally remove it from buildroot. This will happen before mass rebuild. Stay tuned. > > After adding explicite gcc/g++ in BuildRequires it will be extreamly > > hard to switch use for example to use clang. > Well, you imply that currently we could just substitute clang for GCC > and successfully rebuild everything, but that is not the case: there > will be breakage. Mistake .. this is not implication but *observation*/conclusion. Such implication/observation has nothing to do with my person. After add explicit to BuildRequires gcc in case of even try to use clang instead gcc all those specs with "BuildRequires: gcc" will needs to be changed. You can wipe me from this universe and this still will be truth. We are talking about potentially thousands if not tenths of thousands packages spec files. That is really shame that someone did not hold for few seconds to ask themselves "moment!! it it really easiest way?" It would be relatively easy to perform such change in the future in all packages master branches will be used only by rawhide (objectively). However as current Fedora practice shows almost all mass changes never have been done to the bottom because many packages wants to have "universal" spec files. Only this makes such changes way harder or "extremely harder". Instead using git branches almost all Fedora spec files must support all not EOLed Fedora versions, many of them EPEL (at least two versions) and sometimes even CentOS (despite fact that CentOS guys are not using Fedora specs). This is only reason why I wrote that it will be "extremely hard" on any future changes. (Good that recent request to allow use %ifings for SuSE has been refused) Issue is that clang is better and better and (IMO) sooner or later switching to use it could potentially interesting option. Using clang even not (yet) as the option to produce whole distribution using clang is very useful to expose more no-so-well-written part of the code because clang provides now much. IMO it would be good to split every build request to send to build env where everything would be possible to build using clang .. only to store build logs which should show more compile warnings. If Fedora deliberately wants to use gcc (because maintaining gcc it is part of the RH core busies and some guys interested testing bleeding edge gcc code and may be not interested to do the same doe clang) that is fine and what conclusion which I formed can be ignored. However if intention would be to provide here some level of flexibility introducing now gcc/g++ as explicit BuidRequires will close many doors. My proposition is *not* to add gcc/g++ explicit to BuildReequires and use instead glibc-devel and libstdc++-devel modifications and ban use gcc/gcc-c++ in BuildRequires (in most of the cases all current gcc/g++ BuildRequires could be replaced by glibc-devel and libstdc++-devel). All because it is not possible to use C compiler without glibc-devel and C++ compiler without libstdc++-devel. Changes in redhat-rpm-config to be able easy switch between gcc and clang (to other compilers) could be done later. kloczek -- Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/DS3WXH2C7Q6JFQ5X5XOXHRUHN2E3EE3L/
