Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 19:20:17 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Feldman <green@unixhelp.org> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net> Cc: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>, "David O'Brien" <obrien@NUXI.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gcc Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9902281913540.14644-100000@janus.syracuse.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9902281840170.339-100000@picnic.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
How about this, which noone has suggested: Why don't we, for now, import EGCS and libstdc++, getting those working? Of course, here's the trick; let's keep /usr/bin/gcc and /usr/bin/cc as 2.7.2.x like they are now. But for /usr/bin/c++ and /usr/bin/g++, let's have EGCS overwrite the 2.7.2.x ones. As far as I see, EGCS doesn't gain anything for C, and only has gains for C++. Why not switch over partially? We can have 2.7.2.1 not build cc1plus, only cc1 and cc1obj, and have EGCS 1.1.1 build only cc1plus. With this, we get two advantages over the current system. Not only do we get a working, actively supported, C++ compiler, but also we get to keep (for now) the stable, reliable, C compiler we've been depending on for years. Noone can complain that the compiler is destabilizing the system, as all "system" utilities are in C, not C++, and noone can complain that we're behind the times with C++, since we have the latest C++ compiler and libstdc++. Of course, in the long run, once stability is proven, switching to entirely EGCS would make sense. Brian Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ green@unixhelp.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \ http://www.freebsd.org/ _ __ ___ ____ | _ \__ \ |) | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! _ __ ___ ____ _____ |___/___/___/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9902281913540.14644-100000>