On Mon, 2018-07-09 at 17:45 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 at 16:42, Przemek Klosowski
<przemek.klosowski(a)nist.gov> wrote:
[..]
> > > After which, I'm going to ask rel-eng to finally remove it from
> > > buildroot. This will happen before mass rebuild. Stay tuned.
> >
> > After adding explicite gcc/g++ in BuildRequires it will be
> > extreamly
> > hard to switch use for example to use clang.
> Well, you imply that currently we could just substitute clang for
> GCC
> and successfully rebuild everything, but that is not the case:
> there
> will be breakage.
My proposition is *not* to add gcc/g++ explicit to BuildReequires and
use instead glibc-devel and libstdc++-devel modifications and ban use
gcc/gcc-c++ in BuildRequires (in most of the cases all current
gcc/g++
BuildRequires could be replaced by glibc-devel and libstdc++-devel).
All because it is not possible to use C compiler without glibc-devel
and C++ compiler without libstdc++-devel.
It might be a surprise for you, but there are other implementations of
C and C++ standard libraries. If I try to imagine Fedora wanting to
switch to clang in the future, I can very well imagine it wanting to
switch to libc++ at the same time... So your "improved" proposal is,
in fact, just as arbitrary and choice-limiting as the one you
criticize.
Congratulations!
D.