hi, there! On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 05:47:07PM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
> So what? Just because it wasn't part of 4.2 BSD, does that mean that we > should never support it? > > > 2. What is so hard with installing the port. No one has answered *THAT* > > question yet. > > Ports are installed in /usr/local. gcc is installed in /usr. Either > provide a way to install *all* of gcc as part of the system, or provide > a *suppported* way to *replace* it with a port. I do not want to have > two versions of gcc fighting for disk space and confusing users over > PATH issues. please calm down. seems that you have never installed gcc from ports. gcc 2.95 from ports is installed as gcc295/g++295 and correctly gets its bits from /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/xxx, gcc 3.0x from ports is named gcc30/g++30 and so on. There is no PATH issue. Switching between compilers is as easy as setting correct CC/CXX environment/Makefile variables. argument about disk space sounds a bit funny these days. /fjoe To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
