Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 13:19:42 -0400 From: Jeremy Faulkner <gldisater@gldis.ca> To: Roderick van Domburg <freebsd-questions@vandomburg.demon.nl> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why gcc 2.95 in FreeBSD? Message-ID: <20020726131942.A18185@constans.gldis.ca> In-Reply-To: <200207261830.59401.freebsd-questions@vandomburg.demon.nl>; from freebsd-questions@vandomburg.demon.nl on Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 06:30:59PM %2B0200 References: <200207261830.59401.freebsd-questions@vandomburg.demon.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 06:30:59PM +0200, Roderick van Domburg wrote: > Something I've been wondering about but haven't been able to find the answer > to: Why is by default gcc 2.95 included in FreeBSD as opposed to the newer > gcc 3.0? > > When I visit the GNU GCC website, it seems like 2.95 is ancient... it dates > back to 1999. Don't all of the current Linux distributions ship with 3.0? Not > that I believe that we should blindly follow Linux (at all *grin*), but I am > concerned about cross-platform compatibility. > > Regards, > > Roderick newer != better The -stable branch uses what is tried, tested and true. The -current branch is development, -current has gcc 3.1 as the default compiler. 2.95 has been used since 4.0 was -current, and 2.95 will remain in 4.x forever. A look at the release history will show that 4.0-RELEASE was completed in March 2000. Does that answer your question? -- Jeremy Faulkner http://www.gldis.ca To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020726131942.A18185>