Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: CompilerPolicy Change

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:57 AM Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ben Cotton wrote:
> == Summary ==
> Fedora has historically forced packages to build with GCC unless the
> upstream project for the package only supported Clang/LLVM.  This
> change proposal replaces that policy with one where compiler selection
> for Fedora follows the package's upstream preferences.
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name: Jeff Law
> * Email: law@xxxxxxxxxx

I am opposed to this change. Chromium and Firefox build fine with GCC. I
think that a distribution should be built with a consistent toolchain
wherever possible.

Last I checked, there were several reasons why GCC is preferred over
Clang/LLVM in Fedora. And if that should ever change (or have changed
already), then switching the systemwide default (reversing the rules, i.e.,
using GCC only for those packages that do not build with Clang) should be
envisioned. But as far as I know, that is not the case at this time,
considering runtime performance, security features, etc.

I do not see why we should allow yet another special case for Firefox, nor
why we should let random packages make their own choice of compiler and risk
running into hidden binary incompatibilities. We have a system compiler for
a reason.

I don't think we should force Fedora Contributors (Packagers) to change/fix their packages to compile with GCC if upstream decides, supports and tests GCC. There are tons of gcc specific patches in chromium [0], there were some issues in Firefox [1]. Apart from browsers, LibreOffice is going to use LLVM/Clang from Release 7.0 too, so that would potentially be another added work to LibreOffice packagers in the future.

I believe we should make packaging as easy as possible and allowing packagers to work with compilers that have upstream support is a great way to make their lives easier.

I don't know how much of an issue is currently missing -fstack-clash-protection support LLVM, but if Mozilla distributes official Firefox binaries without that flag, Google distributes Chrome without it, I feel it's not a big deal.

[0] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/chromium/blob/master/f/chromium.spec#_205 # To line 250
[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1601707

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux