Re: gcc-2.95: Naming of the TAR file? GCC-2.95.tar.gz? gcc-2.95.tar.gz?

[patrick <patrick at mail dot boxsoft dot com>]

sometime in the late 1900s we saw this silly argument:

> mrs@wrs.com (Mike Stump) said:
> > > From: Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com>
> > > - gcc-2.95.tar.{gz|bz2} or GCC-2.95.tar.{gz|bz2}?
> > > - unpack into ./gcc-2.95/ or ./GCC-2.95/?
> 
> > Lowercase in both situations.  It has had this name for quite a long
> > time, and I see no reason to change it now.  The term gcc is ambiguous
> > and has been for a long while.
> 
> It used to be gcc for C + C++ + objC, sure. But earlier it was gcc, g++,
> ...  It started being egcs and acquired a lot of other languages in the
> process (g77, chill, Java). And then egcs got renamed GNU Compiler
> Collection, but the tarball is still egcs-*.
> 
> Please, settle on _one_ name, _one_ interpretation! And grab the oportunity
> of cleaning up this namespace (as GCC internally got cleaned up :). gcc is
> (and will ever be) the GNU C compiler, better invent a new name for the
> collection. Even if only by different capitalization. Eliminate one reason
> for confusion.


this is unix land....stay with lowercase.  much more pleasent to look
at and type (wasting keystrokes with shifts isn't necessary).


regards,


patrick