Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] configure: Default to 'cc', not 'gcc', on MacOS X

[Brad Smith <brad@comstyle.com>]

On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 08:33:17AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 22 November 2012 00:04, Andreas F??rber <andreas.faerber@web.de> wrote:
> > Am 22.11.2012 00:19, schrieb Peter Maydell:
> >> On 17 November 2012 13:10, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>> On 17 November 2012 13:02, Andreas F??rber <andreas.faerber@web.de> wrote:
> >>>> Am 16.11.2012 17:37, schrieb Peter Maydell:
> >>>>> +if test "$(uname -s)" = "Darwin"; then
> >>>>> +  # On MacOS X the standard supported system compiler is 'cc' (usually clang),
> >>>>> +  # and 'gcc' is a legacy llvm-gcc which is rather elderly and best avoided.
> >>>>
> >>>> This comment strikes me as wrong in this generality. It should at least
> >>>> be qualified with OSX version numbers.
> >>>
> >>> How about "and if 'gcc' is not the same as 'cc' then it is a legacy llvm-gcc
> >>> which is rather elderly and best avoided" ? I'd rather not get into having
> >>> to research which versions of OSX shipped with which compiler as 'cc',
> >>> when really the point is that 'cc' will always give you whichever compiler
> >>> Apple thought was the best default for that version.
> >>
> >> Andreas: ping? are you happy with this suggested rephrasing?
> >
> > Not quite... clang is a relatively new thing. On v10.5.8 ppc64 'cc' is a
> > symlink to a real (well, Apple-flavoured) 'gcc-4.0'.
> 
> Yes, that's the case where gcc is the same as cc, ie the "if" condition
> in the comment is false. (I guess this is saying my rephrasing is at
> best not very clear...)
> 
> > What about "... (clang on recent systems) and 'gcc' may be a legacy
> > llvm-gcc ..."?
> 
> Sounds ok.
> 
> >> Do you
> >> think this is 1.3 material? (now the static-stublib stuff is in it's
> >> less critical, but it still seems like the right idea...)
> >
> > I wouldn't be opposed to taking the default change into 1.3 as long as
> > we can still override it to a specific compiler.
> 
> --cc=whatever remains available.
> 
> > But then again there's the question of why not doing it on Linux as well
> > now that we seem to compile under clang, we have cc -> gcc-4.7 on
> > openSUSE 12.2. Among our supported platforms only Solaris comes to my
> > mind where cc might be an incompatible proprietary compiler.
> 
> Do any of the BSDs ship with some odd non-GPL thing as cc ?

non-GPL yes, odd no.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.