From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1G5QRs-0001M2-NB for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 17:12:01 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k6PHA2Fb028753; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 17:10:02 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6PH4V2u023162 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 17:04:31 GMT Received: from gentoo.org (cp237988-a.mill1.nb.home.nl [84.29.235.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D548642F7 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 17:04:30 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 19:07:09 +0200 From: Harald van =?utf-8?Q?D=C4=B3k?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Replacing cpu-feature USE flags Message-ID: <20060725170708.GA3567@gentoo.org> References: <200607061252.33028@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <44ACF6C9.7010209@gentoo.org> <1152200486.605.35.camel@onyx> <20060725121446.GD3488@nibiru.local> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060725121446.GD3488@nibiru.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: 577923d8-44c3-408a-a8d0-3aae6a106cc0 X-Archives-Hash: 14478ff9575e7248ff4eaa44815dbd1c On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 02:14:46PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote: > * Ned Ludd schrieb: > > > > > Non gcc compilers have never been supported and probably never will be. > > If someone decides to work on that topic, IMHO the best approach > would be providing an gcc-style frontend, so we actually get > an drop-in-replacement (at least from the command line view). What would it do if a gcc-specific option is used for which the real compiler does not provide any option, even with a different name? If it would ignore it, things would break horribly (just think of -funsigned-char). If it would error out, are any options other than those already specified by POSIX (`man 1p c99`) available on all systems? (If not, no gcc-style frontend is necessary, because the options are already the same for all compilers intended to be usable as a (Unix-like-)system compiler.) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list