From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Mar 30 20:27:55 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mass.dis.org (dhcp45-24.dis.org [216.240.45.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22CFF37B41A for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 20:27:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mass.dis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.dis.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2V4Qmc02215; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 20:26:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org) Message-Id: <200203310426.g2V4Qmc02215@mass.dis.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Alp ATICI Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: icc status on FreeBSD In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 30 Mar 2002 23:19:45 EST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 20:26:48 -0800 From: Michael Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I respect the gcc effort, but if icc is as good as it is told to be > then it could supersede (at least in intel community) gcc. > What is the general sentiment and the will for cooperation about > porting icc to FreeBSD? I doubt that porting will be necessary; I've watched another developer (who will probably come forward when he's ready) compiling large portions of the FreeBSD codebase with the Linux icc binary. Initial performance results were solid but not astounding; we'll see when it's ready, eh? = Mike -- To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. - Theodore Roosevelt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message