On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:50 PM Simo Sorce <simo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 11:50 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 8:27 AM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 6:47 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel > > > <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 05.06.2020 09:52, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > Clang is much better than GCC nowadays. It has better architecture, > > > > support lots of optimizations and analyzers. > > > > > > > > GCC is a legacy compiler. It should be completely replaced by Clang in > > > > the nearest future. > > > > > > > > > > Having worked in a distribution that uses Clang by default > > > (OpenMandriva), I can say that this is *not true*. Switching from GCC > > > to Clang cost OpenMandriva a lot of performance. It also cost them a lot of > > > security hardening at the compiler level. GCC-built binaries are still > > > better, and remain better as long as people are continually using and > > > developing for it. > > > > > > This change appears to largely be driven by the maintainers of web > > > browser packages that upstream have no GCC validation and it has to be > > > > Stop this. This change is driven by the Red Hat toolchain team > > directly, at their own realization that Fedora's compiler policy is > > out of line with upstream reality today. They suggested it, they > > submitted it, and they are driving it. Chromium is used as an example > > only. Please stop gaslighting why Changes are being submitted in > > Fedora. > > > > Focus on the technical merits all you want. > > Hi Josh, > I think (not sure, but I do) that you misread Neal message as accusing > the Fedora packagers of Chromium, while I think Neal was blaming > Chromium upstream for not caring about anything bug clang and making > life hard downstream. > Precisely this. I was not accusing Fedorans of anything. And I still think that the main motivation for the RH Tools team to propose this is because of those specific upstreams. This stuff doesn't come out of a vacuum after all. > I do not know what is what at this point, but please let's all try to > read positive intent first and explain each other. > I was particularly confused and hurt by the accusation, especially since I almost never interact with Josh even when I want to. :( -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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
