Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 6 Feb 2002 17:23:32 -0800
From:      Joe Kelsey <joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us>
To:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: gcc3.x issues
Message-ID:  <15457.55061.55399.596297@zircon.zircon.seattle.wa.us>
In-Reply-To: <20020206170904.C181@dragon.nuxi.com>
References:  <20020206160611.B181@dragon.nuxi.com> <200202070053.g170rjQ19592@aldan.algebra.com> <20020206170904.C181@dragon.nuxi.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It is plain that many people will want to be able to install a version
of gcc that is officially supported and that also includes *all* of the
standard platforms that come as part of the gcc release.

What is so wrong with being able to specify a compilation flag that says
"install all of the extra bits that come with gcc".  This could be off
by default, but be settable on a site-by-site basis for those who feel
that installing gcc et al. just once is plenty instead of having to
track god knows how many different ports supporting wildly varying
versions of gcc.

I agree that installing the entire gcc chain is overkill for many small
sites, but if you have the horsepower, you can choose appropriate points
in the release cycle where you want to install the entire compiler suite
(say right after a major release) and set the appropriate flag *at that
time* to get the bits you want.

Or, it could be a predefined package available for installation that
puts all of the compilers in the same place as the standard gcc/g++,
i.e., /usr instead of /usr/local.

/Joe

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?15457.55061.55399.596297>