On Fri, Jun 5, 2020, 4:15 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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. :(
Sincere apologies Neal. I misread, overreacted, and took out Fedora frustrations on you. I have no excuse.
I'm taking a break from Fedora for a while.
josh
--
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
_______________________________________________ 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
