Re: Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will it become standard compiler?)

Pegasus Mc Cleaft wrote:
> 	At the moment you can already compile gcc 4.3 from the ports tree, however 
> things like binutils only seems to exist in the ports as a cross compiling 
> tool. How hard would it be to add binutils as a port and make the gcc 4.x 
> ports dependent on it? This way you can install gcc 4.3 with the assembler and 
> linker that play nice together during the build? At the moment, I have had to 
> make binutils from a gnu downloaded source and then make gcc 4.3 with a silly 
> make, IE: make AS=/usr/local/bin/as ..........   

I think this would be an excellent approach. I am not sure I agree
with the idea that we _must_ have a compiler toolchain in the base but
it should definitely be possible to "replace" the toolchain in the
base with one from ports with a minimum of hassle.

Of course I'm aware that this will entail a non-trivial amount of
work, not only in changing our existing infrastructure to some extent
but also work to non-toolchain code so that it can work with newer
versions of th build tools. However, if we are fortunate and one of
the current BSDL contenders emerges down the road as a viable
alternative to gcc most of the work necessary to make this change now
will have to be done anyway.

On the one hand I like the "BSD approach" of sticking with tools that
work rather than constantly chasing the latest and greatest. However I
think we can run the risk of becoming mired in our own success, and
losing the agility that we'll need to keep things moving forward in
what will only become a more dynamic environment.


Doug

-- 

    This .signature sanitized for your protection