This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH INSTALLED]: const typedefs part 19/N
On 8/28/07, Dave Korn <dave.korn@artimi.com> wrote:
> On 28 August 2007 15:16, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
> > On 8/28/07, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
> >>> That said, I vote for forcing stage1 to be build with a C++ compiler for
> >>> next stage1.
> >>
> >> I don't think it's reasonable to require a C++ compiler to build the GNU C
> >> compiler, especially on non-GNU platforms. You may only have a C compiler
> >> in the default installation and it should be sufficient to bootstrap GCC.
> >>
> > We already require an ISO C compiler which some platforms do not
> > provide. We already have a list of requirements necessary to do
> > development of our compiler that include a bunch of other packages.
> > Why is "Any version of G++ > 3.0" somehow different?
>
> Because it completely excludes *all* native compilers? Because it's a radical
> about-turn and 180 degree shift in long-standing policy?
Well, make that "any C++ compiler" then. Any moderately sane at least. And no,
I don't see this as "radical about-turn and 180 degree shift in
long-standing policy".
What policy?
Richard.