[edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 00/13] BaseTools, CryptoPkg, MdePkg, OvmfPkg: Delete CLANG35, CLANG38, GCC48, GCC49, rename GCC5 to GCC, update CLANGDWARF, delete VS 2008-2013, EBC

[Ard Biesheuvel]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 at 13:28, Leif Lindholm <quic_llindhol at quicinc.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 09:39:56 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > > - Remove GCC48 and GCC49.
> > >
> > > GCC49 is one GCC tool chain without LTO enable option. GCC5 is another GCC tool chain with LTO enable option.
> > >
> > > They have the different usage. I suggest to keep GCC49 and GCC5 both, and also keep their name as is.
> > >
> >
> > Could we perhaps do
> >
> > GCC49 -> GCC
> > GCC5  -> GCCLTO
>
> Might I suggest the inverse?
>
> GCC49 -> GCCNOLTO
> GCC5  -> GCC
>
> I feel disabling LTO should be seen as the nonstandard approach.
>

That works for me as well.

> Regardless, we (including me) *should* have changed those names as
> soon as we realised we didn't need a GCC51, and the misleading naming
> still frequently causes confusion. So I don't think keeping the
> current names should be considered an option.
>

Agreed.

> > ?
> >
> > As with CLANG35/38, the GCCx names have become rather obsolete, so I'd
> > prefer to have a set of more generic names, and a sliding window of
> > supported versions that can be documented in tools_def.template (and
> > updated at times)
>
> Agreed. And *if* we find a need in the future to add a new archived
> range, we can add that then.
>

Of course. But with the stable tags, I doubt whether this will be necessary.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#102117): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/102117
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/97923603/1813853
Group Owner: devel+owner at edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [edk2-devel-archive at redhat.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-