[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: gcc or cc?



On Fri, Nov 27, 1998 at 16:25:09 +0100, Anders Hammarquist wrote:
> > I think we have two goals here:
> > - Make the developers use gcc for building C code in packages. [*]
> 
> This is IMHO not a good idea. On the alpha architecture, gcc (at least
> 2.7.2.x) is broken, and all Debian packages in the alpha dist are compiled
> with egcs.

Erm. /usr/bin/gcc _is_ egcs gcc on Alpha, unless I'm mistaken.

> Being able to change compilers is a good idea. Mandating that cc be a
> symlink to gcc is not.

Perhaps "mandating that cc on machines used to build packages is a symlink
to the primary C compiler for the architecture the machine runs" come closer
to what we're trying to suggest.

Ray
-- 
UNFAIR  Term applied to advantages enjoyed by other people which we tried 
to cheat them out of and didn't manage. See also DISHONESTY, SNEAKY, 
UNDERHAND and JUST LUCKY I GUESS.     
- The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan  


Reply to: