Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 18:38:39 -0800 (PST) From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <giffunip@tutopia.com> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, bf2006a@yahoo.com Cc: Sean Cavanaugh <Millenia2000@hotmail.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will it becomestandard compiler?) Message-ID: <52572.84275.qm@web32708.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
--- On Sat, 1/31/09, bf <bf2006a@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: bf <bf2006a@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will it becomestandard compiler?)
To: "Mark Linimon" <linimon@lonesome.com>, giffunip@tutopia.com
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, "Sean Cavanaugh" <Millenia2000@hotmail.com>
Date: Saturday, January 31, 2009, 9:21 PM
--- On Sat, 1/31/09, Pedro F. Giffuni <giffunip@tutopia.com> wrote:
...
> Let us assume that you are correct. If no one else saw much value
> in doing it, and you don't think it's worth the effort, then what
> _are_ you complaining about?
Exactly :).
I do see a value in removing GNU readline though.
> Well, gcc certainly isn't ideal. But the improvements are real, even
> if there may be some regressions, too. And the effort involved in
> porting gcc 4.3.x may well be less than that required to enable pcc to
> compile the base on all platforms, let alone most of the third-party
> software.
And it can live happily in the ports tree.
BTW, I hope one of these "real" improvements include building again on PowerPC soon because in the mean time it's simply not an option.
Pedro.
home |
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52572.84275.qm>