Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 07:34:41 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Peter Jeremy <jeremyp@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: EGCS, or EGCS? Message-ID: <19990926233442.3238A1CC2@overcee.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 27 Sep 1999 09:22:51 %2B1000." <99Sep27.092009est.40343@border.alcanet.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Jeremy wrote: > The recent thread about the GCC optimiser prompted me to go and have a > look at gcc's behaviour. This has left me somewhat confused. I > appear to have two complete copies of gcc - one in src/contrib/gcc and > another in src/contrib/egcs/gcc. Both of them have README files > stating that they are EGCS 1.1.2 - though there are substantial > differences between them. > > Both src/contrib/gcc and src/contrib/egcs/gcc appear to be being > updated along the -current tree. > > Looking at src/gnu/usr.bin/cc, it looks like src/contrib/egcs/gcc is > being built - and this is backed up by the output from my regular > buildworld's. > > Can anyone explain this? src/contrib/gcc is where gcc used to live. Then along came egcs with a cygnus-style tree that ended up in src/contrib/egcs (v1.1.1 and later 1.1.2). Now, egcs has become gcc 2.95, so it's going back to src/contrib/ gcc again. src/contrib/egcs will go away and the repo cleared out ala "what src/contrib/egcs?" :-). We can do this before we do a release from the 4.x tree. David O'Brien is working on this now but I think he's suffering from gcc-induced insanity. :-) > Peter Cheers, -Peter 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?19990926233442.3238A1CC2>