Hi Andy,
I think you misunderstood: the proposal is not to drop support for Solaris
compilers altogether, but to move forward to a more recent one (Studio9). I'm
not 100% sure, but I think Sun itself is already starting to drop support
for the older compilers (Workshop6 and Forte7). They were just kept around
at SLAC to support old BaBar releases which used them. (BaBar, for example,
has already moved to Studio9 in its latest software release.)
Does that clarify the proposal?
[How much I hate Sun for these continual name games with their
products...]
Pete
On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 04:52:21AM -0700, Andrew Hanushevsky wrote:
> Hi Pete,
>
> No, I think it would be wrong to disallow using the Forte compiler. In
> general, that compiler picks up errors that other compilers do not and
> produces better code on Solaris/Sparc. Additionally, it provides me with a
> good dbx-able debug version that I don't get from gcc. In general, it
> would be a royal pain for me if I could not use that compiler. Since
> autotolls does work with that cmpiler for other packages (I have used
> packages that use autotools and the Solaris compiler), I don't immediately
> see what the problem is and, whatever it is, why it can't be circumvented.
>
> Andy
>
>
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Peter Elmer wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Derek and I talked on Friday about the migration to autotools. The main
> > outstanding issue (with libtool) would be solved by dropping support
> > for building xrootd with Workshop6 and Forte7 on Solaris. Is there anybody
> > out there who builds xrootd themselves with Forte7 on Solaris rather than
> > using one of the binary downloads?
> >
> > [Andy, I see you still have Forte7 as the default compiler on your machine
> > at SLAC, but I'm guessing that this is just because BaBar constrained
> > this to be the compiler installation on the Sol9 machines. Is that
> > correct? (Anybody know which compiler version shipped with Sol9? In any case
> > the BaBar SRT overrides the default compiler version and actually uses the
> > Studio9 installation from afs in the latest releases.]
> >
> > I _think_ SLAC and In2p3 were the main sites which had solaris and I
> > think that both of them use the binary downloads. ROOT appears to
> > support "CC5.5", which must be XXXX8 (where XXXX8 is whatever name Sun
> > chose between Forte7 and Studio9, how tedious Sun is...). Derek thought
> > that there should be no issues with XXXX8, but was going to verify this.
> >
> > This said, if nobody sees any urgent reason to keep support for building
> > xrootd with Workshop6 and Forte7, I would propose that we will do the following:
> >
> > o Since nobody has reported big problems with xrootd 20050920-0008,
> > I can declare that a "production" build (the last one supporting
> > Workshop6 and Forte7, effectively) (Wilko?)
> >
> > o Derek and I can do the autotools migration on top of this coming
> > week and produce another version completely equivalent (for the
> > existing xrootd code, plus an optional module for the authorization
> > for Alice) to 20050920-0008 up to the autotools changes (and no Workshop6
> > or Forte7 support). This would also be the starting point for the next
> > round of development.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > thanks,
> > Pete
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Peter Elmer E-mail: [log in to unmask] Phone: +41 (22) 767-4644
> > Address: CERN Division PPE, Bat. 32 2C-14, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Elmer E-mail: [log in to unmask] Phone: +41 (22) 767-4644
Address: CERN Division PPE, Bat. 32 2C-14, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
