From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 14 13:39:02 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81378106564A; Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:39:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ken@mthelicon.com) Received: from hercules.mthelicon.com (hercules.mthelicon.com [IPv6:2001:49f0:2023::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 450E08FC36; Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:39:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ken@mthelicon.com) Received: from PegaPegII (93-152-14-233.daisydsl.managedbroadband.co.uk [93.152.14.233]) (authenticated bits=0) by hercules.mthelicon.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n0EDcvRX002220; Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:58 GMT (envelope-from ken@mthelicon.com) Message-ID: <58DAD35B6CCC476E89B9D02F51041E87@PegaPegII> From: "Pegasus Mc Cleaft" To: "Christoph Mallon" , "Doug Barton" References: <20090113044111.134EC1CC0B@ptavv.es.net> <20090113222023.GA51810@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <496D1ED6.4090202@FreeBSD.org> <200901132356.40820.ken@mthelicon.com><496DCC38.4010809@FreeBSD.org> <496DD37E.5010900@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <496DD37E.5010900@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:56 -0000 Organization: Feathers MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="KOI8-U"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6001.18000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18049 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 090113-1, 13/01/2009), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will it become standard compiler?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Pegasus Mc Cleaft List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:39:03 -0000 > Doug Barton schrieb: >> Pegasus Mc Cleaft wrote: >>> At the moment you can already compile gcc 4.3 from the ports tree, >>> however things like binutils only seems to exist in the ports as a cross >>> compiling tool. How hard would it be to add binutils as a port and make >>> the gcc 4.x ports dependent on it? This way you can install gcc 4.3 with >>> the assembler and linker that play nice together during the build? At >>> the moment, I have had to make binutils from a gnu downloaded source and >>> then make gcc 4.3 with a silly make, IE: make AS=/usr/local/bin/as >>> .......... >> >> I think this would be an excellent approach. I am not sure I agree >> with the idea that we _must_ have a compiler toolchain in the base but >> it should definitely be possible to "replace" the toolchain in the >> base with one from ports with a minimum of hassle. I'm not sure I like the idea of not having _a_ compiler in the base. I'm not really sure how that would work when you wanted to update and build the sources. I suppose you would need to install a binary port of the compiler (et. all) before you could build a more recent tool-chain. Perhapse another option.... If gcc 4.2 && buildtools 2.15 is the end of the road for what BSD is able to include under GPL V2. Can we draw a line under it and continue to include it as buildable with the world if a configure option like "option BUILDGCC42" is in the kernel config file? This way an admin who wanted to build it and use it as a primer could, before downloading the port and building the later versions (if he wanted to, or there organization allowed him to). Some of the older *nix's I have worked on (OSF/1, HPUX, SCO, etc) have a very basic (but normally optimized compiler) for that platform that is enough to compile a version of gcc that will be used to compile other tools and services. >> On the one hand I like the "BSD approach" of sticking with tools that >> work rather than constantly chasing the latest and greatest. However I >> think we can run the risk of becoming mired in our own success, and >> losing the agility that we'll need to keep things moving forward in >> what will only become a more dynamic environment. I have always loved the way that BSD (and most *nix's) have most of the tools I need out of the box to get a system running (or running again if it gets completely borked) ~Peg