* Jeff Law:
I'm not suggesting switching the default. I'm suggesting the
compiler
choice be made by the upstream projects. Some prefer LLVM, others
prefer GCC. Fedora should get out of the way and use the same tools
that the upstream projects are using.
Do we know how many upstream projects actually recommend building with a
recent Clang upstream release? Chromium explicitly does not:
| Chromium ships a prebuilt clang binary. It's just upstream clang built
| at a known-good revision that we bump every two weeks or so.
|
| This is the only supported compiler for building Chromium.
<
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/clang.md>
Currently, it's this build:
$ ./src/third_party/llvm-build/Release+Asserts/bin/clang++ --version
clang version 11.0.0 (
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/
a6ae333a0c23fc9b0783ca45e2676abac00c6723)
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /home/test/chromium/./src/third_party/llvm-build/Release+Asserts/bin
So something pulled recently from the development branch, not a release
branch.
In my experience, this is pretty typical: Upstreams leaning towards
Clang expect that you use their prebuilt compiler, not a system
compiler.
Using Clang downstream may make things simpler for packagers, but a
system-supplied Clang compiler is rarely a preferred upstream choice
(not even on Macos, where there is no real choice anymore).
On the other hand, there is demand from users (not just packagers) for
the LLVM-based toolchain, and increased use by Fedora packagers will
help us to improve the quality of Fedora's version of it. Fortunately,
for this effect, it does not matter *why* Fedora packagers choose Clang.
Thanks,
Florian