This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Converting GCC to compilation with C++
- From: "Dave Korn" <dk at artimi dot com>
- To: "'Florian Weimer'" <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 14:52:35 +0100
- Subject: RE: Converting GCC to compilation with C++
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Florian Weimer
> Sent: 13 July 2004 12:19
> To: Dave Korn
> * Dave Korn:
> > There's one thing even more important than the issue of whether we
> > have to use C or a C++ compilers to build gcc, and that is that it
> > should always be possible to build gcc using the native/proprietary
> > (non-gcc) tools that come with a system, so that you can then
> > replace those tools with gnu tools.
> Why do you think users can't install binary distributions instead?
I just think people should be able to download and build the sources to
get a native compiler on any hosted system, without there being a
requirement beyond what the system comes with out-of-the-box. If the
manufacturer doesn't supply a binary distro, and gcc can't be built on the
native system's tools, then it's a barrier to entry if the whole thing has
to be cross-built on some other system altogether that already has native
gcc available. Maybe not a huge one, but I'm in favour of making it as easy
as possible for people to get to grips with the whole concept of open source
in that way.
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....