From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 30 01:14:15 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 D1E1E106564A for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:14:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrew@areilly.bpa.nu) Received: from nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com (nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com [61.9.168.146]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F308FC0A for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:14:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrew@areilly.bpa.nu) Received: from nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com ([124.188.162.219]) by nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090130011413.IGSL1877.nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com@nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com> for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:14:13 +0000 Received: from areilly.bpa.nu ([124.188.162.219]) by nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090130011409.HCRE12531.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@areilly.bpa.nu> for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:14:09 +0000 Received: (qmail 86814 invoked by uid 501); 30 Jan 2009 01:13:52 -0000 Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:13:52 +1100 From: Andrew Reilly To: Garance A Drosihn Message-ID: <20090130011352.GA85741@duncan.reilly.home> References: <20090128155340.GA75143@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <7508A5B5-C6D2-498A-AEA1-D84E85F1D743@mac.com> <200901291243.00378.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <49811242.7030106@delphij.net> <498116AB.2060105@gmail.com> <49816854.9060909@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150201.49825461.0036,ss=1,fgs=0 Cc: Christoph Mallon , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will it becomestandard compiler?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:14:16 -0000 On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 03:26:29PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 9:27 AM +0100 1/29/09, Christoph Mallon wrote: > >Eitan Adler schrieb: > >>To quote from the FAQ: > >>Who does this change affect? > >> Nobody who is currently using GCC should be affected by this change. > > > >Let me repeat that: > >"Nobody who is currently using GCC *should* be affected by this change." > > > >Emphasize mine. > > There have been a couple of different issues brought up in this thread, > and I've lost track of which one we're on. But one of the issues is > the use of LLVM+gcc, and my guess is that the above statement would not > apply to that. That is just my guess, of course. It seems to me that LLVM+gcc is precicely the condition that the GCC maintainers are attempting to prevent with the GPLv3 version of the libgcc exception. It almost certainly doesn't constitute an "Eligible Compilation Process". They've historically refused to break out a useful intermediate (parse tree or RTL) form explicitly so that gcc couldn't be used as a convenient front end for a proprietary code generator. But, on the other hand, they didn't seem to mind adding the pico-java back-end, which is much the same idea, so perhaps this speculation is totally wrong. In that case I have no idea what use case they're so keen to prevent. Cheers, Andrew