Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 17:48:07 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> To: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> Cc: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.de>, FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: gcc lies? Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.93.960707173906.6165A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <199607070830.BAA00607@rah.star-gate.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It's was probably done more for compilability and stability. I just got word that they've been using gcc 2 for a couple of months now. -mike On Sun, 7 Jul 1996, Amancio Hasty wrote: > Dumb question , is gcc-1.42 a lot faster than gcc-2.x? > > Tnks, > Amancio > > >From The Desk Of Greg Lehey : > > Michael Hancock writes: > > > > > > This is probably why BSDI uses gcc 1.x for the kernel and gives their > > > screaming customers 2.7.2. > > > > Hey, you're right, even BSD/OS 2.1 still uses gcc 1.42. You'd think > > they would have got their act together by now. But I remember the > > background: there was something to do with kernel structures being > > aligned differently under gcc 2.x. You'd think they would have it > > fixed by now, though. > > > > Greg > > > > -- michaelh@cet.co.jp http://www.cet.co.jp CET Inc., Daiichi Kasuya BLDG 8F 2-5-12, Higashi Shinbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105 Japan Tel: +81-3-3437-1761 Fax: +81-3-3437-1766
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SV4.3.93.960707173906.6165A-100000>