Re: PCC and FreeBSD in the future?

On 10/17/07, Brooks Davis <brooks_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 02:28:01PM -0700, David Leimbach wrote:
> > On 10/17/07, Roman Divacky <rdivacky_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:27:58PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
> > > > * Ed Schouten <ed_at_fxq.nl> wrote:
> > > > > One of the major obstacles for PCC is that it didn't support a way
> to
> > > > > pack structures in a comfortable way. Most of the FreeBSD userland
> > > just
> > > > > built with it. Most of the stuff that didn't compile properly, was
> > > > > related to kernel headers, using __attribute__ stuff, instead of
> the
> > > > > cdef'd stuff, like __packed. It seems things have changed in the
> mean
> > > > > time.
> > > >
> > > > Indeed; PCC now supports _Pragma("packed"). I've attached a patch
> for
> > > > sys/cdefs.h that should make at least src/bin compile like it
> should.
> > > > The patch is in no way meant to be complete.
> > >
> > > on the other hand llvm-gcc (and clang in the near future) compiles
> > > basically
> > > everything out of the box + its highly optimizing (yet still much
> faster
> > > than
> > > gcc) + BSD licensed.. ;)
> > >
> >
> > It's derived from gcc yet BSD licensed?  Erm, how?
>
> The gcc frontend option is GPL licensed, but the rest of the system is BSD
> licensed including the clang frontend (not yet complete).
>
> -- Brooks
>
>
That's what I thought.  By the way, I've been using the gcc front end for a
little bit now :-)  I was just asking the question trying to figure out if I
was going crazy or not.
I didn't think it was a fully compatible re-write of the gcc front-end.  The
prospect of a fully gcc compatible front-end that's BSD licensed was pretty
dang exciting for about 3 seconds.

Dave