Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.gtn.com!wup-gate.wup.de!usenet From: andreas@sunny.gun.de (Andreas Klemm) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: gcc 2.7.2p vs. gcc 2.6.3 Date: 25 Jul 1996 15:19:04 GMT Organization: Solaris 2.4 11/94 research kitchen Lines: 24 Message-ID: <ANDREAS.96Jul25171904@sunny.gun.de> References: <4sl70i$301@bofh.noc.best.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: sunny.wup.de In-reply-to: rone@bofh.noc.best.net's message of 18 Jul 1996 04:26:10 -0700 In article <4sl70i$301@bofh.noc.best.net> rone@bofh.noc.best.net (Ron Echeverri) writes: > From: rone@bofh.noc.best.net (Ron Echeverri) > Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc > Date: 18 Jul 1996 04:26:10 -0700 > Organization: fidgety systems administrators gmbh > > I've installed the pgcc port and i've used it sparingly; while i know > that replacing the system binaries with new stuff is usually not a > good idea, i still wondered as to whether, since pgcc claims to be > optimized for the Pentium chip, would there be any significant > improvement if it were made the system default C compiler? I think pgcc isn't mature enough to make it to the default compiler ! Another disadvantage is, that a 'make world' doesn't run without errors. I think you should wait, until gcc-2.7.3 will be released. If I remember right, the new gcc will be included into -current sooner or later ;) Andreas /// -- -- aklemm@wup.de /\/\___ Wiechers & Partner Datentechnik GmbH Andreas Klemm ___/\/\/ - Support Unix -