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>