On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 01:36:37PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:30 -0400, Igor Raits wrote: > > ... > > > > Sadly some upstreams insist on clang just because they like it more, > > without any technical reason. The question that comes to my mind: > > Should we still try to convince upstreams to use GCC in such cases or > > not? > It happens (choosing Clang because they like it) and while we can (and have) > engaged upstreams on this topic and I suspect we will continue to do so in some > cases. > > But in the end I think we still have to respect the upstream project's choices, > even if it's just because they like Clang/LLVM more than GCC. Why? Shouldn't the Fedora maintainers be able to decide this? If they have been using GCC for years and it hasn't been an obstackle for them, why should they switch? If I understand the LO case, it is just that LO sometimes uses the Skia library which is written by Google and Google likes compiler monoculture and is using heavily #ifdef __clang__ in it and using the clang variants of the generic vectors guarded by that, and as fallback just doesn't use simd. I believe Honza Hubicka had quite some changes for Skia, not sure if they went upstream already or not. But the maintainers should be able to choose, build just Skia with clang and rest of LO with GCC, or everything with GCC and with help from us get Skia into shape for better portability (that would be ideal, but of course can mean more hopefully one time work), or build all of it with Clang/LLVM. Jakub _______________________________________________ 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
