Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 02:18:11 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Jan Lentfer <Jan.Lentfer@web.de> Cc: alpha@FreeBSD.org, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> Subject: Re: Open Watcom compiler Message-ID: <3E4A1F63.678B2069@mindspring.com> References: <20030211003353.GA12187@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20030212084617.GA98667@dragon.nuxi.com> <1045044390.2958.3.camel@neslonek>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jan Lentfer wrote: > On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 09:46, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 04:33:53PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > I'm thinking about porting the Open Watcom compiler to FreeBSD. I > > > expect the code generator to be better than gcc, but don't know > > > yet how it compares to Compaq's compiler. > > > > Surely the Compaq compiler's optimizer will be better. Why waste the > > energy porting Open Watcom, rather than fix all the GCC'isms in /sys that > > prevent the use of the Compaq compiler? > > What about the legal issues? If I build FreeBSD with the ccc and use it > in an production environment, I would need more then a hobbyist license, > wouldn't I? Only if you compiled crap with CCC to run on that FreeBSD. There's nothing in the CCC license that really prevents hobbiests compiling the OS itself, and then you using the results of a hobbiest effort in a production environment. One thing that's always surprised me, though I guess if you do the multiple stage thing, it shouldn't, is why people don't compile gcc with CCC to make the gcc binary run faster. Even if compiling gcc again with gcc would slow the thing back down... -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E4A1F63.678B2069>