Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OpenBSD Switches To Clang Compiler For i386/AMD64

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OpenBSD Switches To Clang Compiler For i386/AMD64

    Phoronix: OpenBSD Switches To Clang Compiler For i386/AMD64

    OpenBSD is now the latest BSD switching from GCC to LLVM's Clang C/C++ compiler by default...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Why did they use such an old GCC version?!

    Comment


    • #3
      GCC7>>>GCC4 from Stone Age

      Comment


      • #4
        I don't know the current status, but FreeBSD 10 compiled from Clang was much slower than compiled with GCC. But they didn't care, it's ideological for them (which is cool). It would be nice to run some benchmarks pre/post. I might just do that tonight.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Steffo View Post
          Why did they use such an old GCC version?!
          Stability reasons, they got tired of dealing with correctness regressions between GCC versions and just gave up and maintained their own GCC.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Steffo View Post
            Why did they use such an old GCC version?!
            afaik, they didn't like the license used in newer GCC versions or something like that.
            Too much copyleft for their tastes, they strive for giving their users complete freedom, even letting a commercial entity piggyback their work for free and release only binary stuff. Copyleft as required in GNU licenses would not allow that.

            All other BSDs have migrated to Clang (time ago) for the same reason.

            Comment


            • #7

              Actually (also because of ) restrictions imposed by transition from GPLv2 to GPLv3. And GCC 4.2 last GPLv2 Release, FreeBSD deprecating GCC years ago

              Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite


              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                afaik, they didn't like the license used in newer GCC versions or something like that.
                Too much copyleft for their tastes, they strive for giving their users complete freedom, even letting a commercial entity piggyback their work for free and release only binary stuff. Copyleft as required in GNU licenses would not allow that.

                All other BSDs have migrated to Clang (time ago) for the same reason.
                The compiler has nothing to do with their work. GCC can compile proprietary applications as well.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post

                  The compiler has nothing to do with their work. GCC can compile proprietary applications as well.
                  The actual issue the the tivoization clause in the GPLv3. The BSDs want their distributions to be capable of being made proprietary. Beats the fuck out of me why, but that's what it is.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by duby229 View Post

                    The actual issue the the tivoization clause in the GPLv3. The BSDs want their distributions to be capable of being made proprietary. Beats the fuck out of me why, but that's what it is.
                    Why not? The fact is being truly open like BSD means that you get some support from corporate sponsors be it money or bug fixes. It is obviously a different subset of the corporate world that has adopted Linux.

                    No software development and licensing model is perfect, it is good to have options. It is even better to have options since the advent of GPL 3 which is a pretty hideous license for something that is supposedly open.

                    I find it a bit strange that people get emotional over alternative open source licenses. Freedom is a good thing and choices simply expand freedom.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X