Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:50:57 -0800 (PST) From: Alex Zepeda <garbanzo@hooked.net> To: Brian Feldman <green@unixhelp.org> Cc: Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>, "David O'Brien" <obrien@NUXI.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gcc Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9902281648090.88582-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9902281913540.14644-100000@janus.syracuse.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, Brian Feldman wrote: > How about this, which noone has suggested: > Why don't we, for now, import EGCS and libstdc++, getting those working? > Of course, here's the trick; let's keep /usr/bin/gcc and /usr/bin/cc as 2.7.2.x > like they are now. But for /usr/bin/c++ and /usr/bin/g++, let's have EGCS > overwrite the 2.7.2.x ones. As far as I see, EGCS doesn't gain anything for C, > and only has gains for C++. Why not switch over partially? We can have > 2.7.2.1 not build cc1plus, only cc1 and cc1obj, and have EGCS 1.1.1 build only > cc1plus. Perhaps on face value it's an interesting idea. Debian does something similar. But egcs post 1.1 (or is it 1.1.1) use binary incompatable exception handling.. as in it's not compatable with gcc 2.8.x. But then you also get to keep two versions of gcc in the CVS tree. Plus egcs also supports more optimizations than our gcc does. Why not rip the compiler out completely and let the user drop in their favorite compiler (egcs, tcc, etc, etc)? ;-) - alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9902281648090.88582-100000>