From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Feb 28 11:25: 2 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from smtp1.vnet.net (smtp1.vnet.net [166.82.1.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1B015272 for ; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:24:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rivers@dignus.com) Received: from dignus.com (ponds.vnet.net [166.82.177.48]) by smtp1.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA05597; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 14:24:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from lakes.dignus.com (lakes.dignus.com [10.0.0.3]) by dignus.com (8.9.1/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA11489; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 14:22:59 -0500 (EST) Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.dignus.com (8.9.1/8.6.9) id OAA23087; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 14:22:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 14:22:57 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas David Rivers Message-Id: <199902281922.OAA23087@lakes.dignus.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, jef53313@bayou.uh.edu Subject: Re: Why gcc is the system's compiler. In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > I have recently been wodering why FreeBSD uses gcc as the system compiler > as opposed to whatever compiler came out of CSRG. Did that compiler have > to be removed as a result of the lawsuit, or was it simply too old to be > worth updating. Not to knock gcc, but I, as I believe many people think, > would rather the base distribution be all BSD tools, or at least have a > Berkeley style license. I believe the compiler was owned by AT&T... If if remember correctly, though, the Pascal compiler was from Berkely... but it re-used a good portion of the C compiler... - Dave Rivers - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message