Re: GCC withdraw

I've been reading this thread and must confess that I'm a little confused
about what exactly is being discussed.

* I presume we've all agreed that "clang" is installed by default in FreeBSD-10.

* I presume everyone agrees that "cc" is "clang" in FreeBSD-10.

* There obviously needs to be a "gcc" command in FreeBSD-10, since "cc" and "gcc" are synonyms in so many people's finger-memory.

Is the debate here just a question of whether "gcc" is "clang" or "the *real* GCC"?

Would it be feasible to install GCC as "gcc42" or something
similar so people could still reach it regardless of what the "gcc"
alias pointed to?



On 30 Aug 2013, at 08:56, Jonathan Anderson <jonathan_at_freebsd.org> wrote:

> ... then people wanting to compile the base system with gcc/g++ ...


I'm still curious *why* some people want this?

Personally, I would rather compile the base system with the
*supported* compiler.  Today, on FreeBSD-CURRENT/x86
and FreeBSD-CURRENT/amd64, that is clang.



On Aug 30, 2013, at 12:18 AM, Julian Elischer <julian_at_FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> Clang is new. clang WILL HAVE BUGS.

Based on my own experience, I would put this rather differently:

  GCC and Clang are COMPILERS.
  Therefore, they have DIFFERENT BUGS.

This is why I worry about having "cc" and "gcc" be different
compilers.

Tim