From owner-freebsd-current Wed Aug 7 12:43:12 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA02518 for current-outgoing; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:43:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA02513 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:43:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA02426; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:54:08 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:54:08 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199608071854.MAA02426@rocky.mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams To: "Justin T. Gibbs" Cc: Nate Williams , Poul-Henning Kamp , "Rodney W. Grimes" , peter@spinner.dialix.com (Peter Wemm), current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Whither gcc 2.7? In-Reply-To: <199608071850.LAA28695@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <199608071727.LAA01936@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199608071850.LAA28695@freefall.freebsd.org> Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Justin T. Gibbs writes: > >In any case, if we bring in gcc, bringing in the *entire* distribution > >would be a big mistake IMHO. The usefulness of other parts is minimal > >at best, and the cost is spectacularly large in terms of disk space. > >Heck, the entire gcc 2.7.2 distribution is bigger than bin, include, > >libexec, sbin, and usr.bin combined. :( > > Why not import the whole thing but only distribute the i386 code by > default? We can easily setup additional CVSup targets for the non > i386 portions of the compiler for people interested in cross compiling > or working on a new port. This is a workable solution, as long as all the distribution methods allow for it. (I'm still waiting to get a PC98 target distribution, which has the same complexity as what you just suggested.) Nate