Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:29:44 -0700 From: "David Leimbach" <leimy2k@gmail.com> To: "Brooks Davis" <brooks@freebsd.org> Cc: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Ed Schouten <ed@fxq.nl>, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri <wearabnet@yahoo.ca> Subject: Re: PCC and FreeBSD in the future? Message-ID: <3e1162e60710171529m16828b5ejecaad54d239324f1@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20071017220039.GA10642@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <132802.25776.qm@web33711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20071017173941.GT5411@hoeg.nl> <20071017182758.GU5411@hoeg.nl> <20071017203438.GA37057@freebsd.org> <3e1162e60710171428i1c28c7a5ha285a4d4ea8f5ce5@mail.gmail.com> <20071017220039.GA10642@lor.one-eyed-alien.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/17/07, Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 02:28:01PM -0700, David Leimbach wrote:
> > On 10/17/07, Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:27:58PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
> > > > * Ed Schouten <ed@fxq.nl> wrote:
> > > > > One of the major obstacles for PCC is that it didn't support a way
> to
> > > > > pack structures in a comfortable way. Most of the FreeBSD userland
> > > just
> > > > > built with it. Most of the stuff that didn't compile properly, was
> > > > > related to kernel headers, using __attribute__ stuff, instead of
> the
> > > > > cdef'd stuff, like __packed. It seems things have changed in the
> mean
> > > > > time.
> > > >
> > > > Indeed; PCC now supports _Pragma("packed"). I've attached a patch
> for
> > > > sys/cdefs.h that should make at least src/bin compile like it
> should.
> > > > The patch is in no way meant to be complete.
> > >
> > > on the other hand llvm-gcc (and clang in the near future) compiles
> > > basically
> > > everything out of the box + its highly optimizing (yet still much
> faster
> > > than
> > > gcc) + BSD licensed.. ;)
> > >
> >
> > It's derived from gcc yet BSD licensed? Erm, how?
>
> The gcc frontend option is GPL licensed, but the rest of the system is BSD
> licensed including the clang frontend (not yet complete).
>
> -- Brooks
>
>
That's what I thought. By the way, I've been using the gcc front end for a
little bit now :-) I was just asking the question trying to figure out if I
was going crazy or not.
I didn't think it was a fully compatible re-write of the gcc front-end. The
prospect of a fully gcc compatible front-end that's BSD licensed was pretty
dang exciting for about 3 seconds.
Dave
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3e1162e60710171529m16828b5ejecaad54d239324f1>