This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Cleanups for the m68k backend
On Wednesday 09 July 2003 00:37, Marc Espie wrote:
> These days, NetBSD builds most of its arches using cross-compilation.
> OpenBSD development insists on native compilation. For starters, it
> has found bugs, and helps keep old targets alive by making sure they
> can at least run through a make build.
> So, we don't have a complete cross-compilation framework, and it's not
> seen as a priority.
Last time I installed NetBSD 1.5 on the Amiga, the build was completely
self-hosted.
So I guess cross-compiling is just an option added lately to NetBSD
for people who aren't willing to wait 8 hours just for building the
kernel as I did too many times.
> [...very detailed explanation of the current situation...]
>
> If you haven't already, shake out the misconception that OpenBSD is
> just NetBSD plus a few security changes. That hasn't been true for the
> last five years or so. NetBSD and OpenBSD are distinct systems that
> share a common ancestor and still do some cross-fertilization.
I see. Actually, my assumption was based on how things were at the time
I was an active NetBSD developer, and that's 4-5 years ago.
Just one question: In OpenBSD's CVS repository I see no version of
gcc later than gcc 2.95.3. Is it ok to presume that you won't be upgrading
the system compiler to gcc 3.4 without also importing a newer version of
binutils?
If it's so, then OpenBSD is not a show-stopper for the decision to drop
the MIT syntax.
--
// Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept.
\X/ http://www.develer.com/
Please don't send Word attachments - http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html