Contributed by weerd on from the bigger-binaries dept.
Recently, there has been a lot of work going into the tree to move some architectures to GCC4 (the latest non-GPL3 version). Those of you following source-changes@ and/or ports-changes@ will have seen the large amount of commits to prepare for this new compiler. Just today, Mark Kettenis (kettenis@) committed the bits to switch the amd64 and sparc64 architectures over to GCC4.
For the people following -current, please be advised that this is a flag day, you will need to follow the steps in the faq to upgrade your machine. There was another one about config(8) needing an update very recently and soon more architectures will follow amd64 and sparc64, so keep a close eye on that page if you're on an architecture that hasn't moved yet.
In addtion to the move to GCC4, FORTRAN f77 is moving out of the src tree into the ports tree. Some of the reasons were stated by Marc Espie (espie@) on the ports@ mailing list.
Update: Marco Peereboom requests more people help test the move to GCC4. Interested people should check out his website where he collects results and which describes the testing procedure. If you want to send him your results, send them to marco@openbsd.org.
(Comments are closed)
By Marc Espie (espie) espie@nerim.net on
Specifically, the sparc64 and amd64 architectures have been selected because they benefit a bit more from gcc4, but there are other architectures in the queue... they're *all* depending on test results from amd64/sparc64 proving that the change is okay...
and this includes selecting your favorite apps and giving them a run.
I don't have much illusion about that. Actual developers are still catching bugs better than most of our user, but still, one can dream...
Comments
By Scot Bontrager (cloudkucooland) on http://www.indievisible.org/
>
> Specifically, the sparc64 and amd64 architectures have been selected because they benefit a bit more from gcc4, but there are other architectures in the queue... they're *all* depending on test results from amd64/sparc64 proving that the change is okay...
>
> and this includes selecting your favorite apps and giving them a run.
>
> I don't have much illusion about that. Actual developers are still catching bugs better than most of our user, but still, one can dream...
Been running a gcc4/amd64 build for 24 hours now with no issues. Happened to put a new drive in yesterday and it seems slow, but I think that's the drive and not the build. I have seen systat reporting livelocks on my em interface. I'll watch and report.
By jirib (jirib) jirib@mailinator.com on pcc
Comments
By Medina Clavijo (ventejuy) on http://ventejuy.es
+1 pcc
By phessler (phessler) on http://theapt.org
pcc doesn't do c++, which was one of the primary reasons for this upgrade.
By Marc Espie (espie) on
pcc might happen when people spend enough time making it work.
You have little ideas how many hours were sunk in the gcc4 update. And that's a comparatively small amount of time compared to what would be needed to get pcc into shape.
Yeah, pcc is all cool and that, but unless a lot of actual people with madz programming skills jump in and start coding, it won't happen anytime in the near future.
Comments
By Ted Walther (TedWalther) on http://reactor-core.org/
Ragge must have been watching this thread; the past few days he's really gotten busy with bug-fixes and optimizations.
By Anonymous Coward (zdw) zdw@artisancomputer.com on http://artisancomputer.com
http://llvm.org/
Actively worked on by a larger community than pcc.
Comments
By Matthew Szudzik (mszudzik) on
>
> http://llvm.org/
>
> Actively worked on by a larger community than pcc.
The relative merits of LLVM, GCC, and PCC have been discussed repeatedly. For example, see
Comments
By Medina Clavijo (ventejuy) on http://ventejuy.es
> >
> > http://llvm.org/
> >
> > Actively worked on by a larger community than pcc.
>
>
> The relative merits of LLVM, GCC, and PCC have been discussed repeatedly. For example, see
>
> http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20090623180311&pid=48
> http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20080629133049
Very good articles. I think PCC KISS phisolophy is a very valuable thing.
Comments
By Peter Ljung (peter_ljung) on http://www.lounge.se
I suppose one attractive aspect of LLVM/Clang is future (LLVM 2.8) support for ARMv7 architecture. GCC has not included ARMv7 until 4.3 release as I understand.
LLVM 2.8 Release Notes
GCC 4.3 Release Series
Would be great to see OpenBSD on platforms like Beagle Board, Gumstix and future ARM cortex based laptops and servers some day ...
Comments
By Nima Hoda (Nima) on
>
> Would be great to see OpenBSD on platforms like Beagle Board, Gumstix and future ARM cortex based laptops and servers some day ...
If I understand correctly, ARMv7 maintains compatibility with ARMv5, so I don't think specific support is necessary.
There has been work done on making a beagleboard port (mostly by Dale Rahn, I believe):
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/arch/arm/armv7/
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/arch/beagle/
From beagle/conf/GENERIC:
# CPU options
options CPU_ARMv7 # Support the ARMv7
makeoptions CPUFLAGS="-mcpu=armv5" # dont have gcc v7 support yet.
-Nima