On Sun, 20 Aug 2000, Jason Jesso wrote:
>I am new, so bare with me. What led me to believe that gcc replaces
>egcs is: http://gcc.gnu.org/releases.html
>
>"After the April 1999 merger between GCC and EGCS, only a single version
>number is maintained."
>
>After that only gcc releases are available. So do I get the latest of
>egcs???
>
>Maybe I am totally wrong here. I was told by people from another news
>group to
>get the latest gcc release which has more streams.
Ok.. Several years ago we had gcc. Development seemed to stifle
with it, and people upset about the slow plodding gcc development
forked off and started egcs based on gcc.
That development went much faster and smoother than the gcc
compiler, and over time, egcs improvements were slowly added to
gcc.
A year or so ago GNU decided that there was no point in the
existing gcc being the official GNU compiler anymore when egcs
was very stable and in much more active development. egcs all
along had basically been gcc plus a lot of extra stuff. So GNU
then made egcs officially the GNU compiler, and merged the rest
of gcc's stuff into egcs. egcs thus became "gcc" at that point.
gcc == egcs
egcs == gcc
I don't know what the current official naming practice is, to
call it gcc or egcs, but I've seen both used, and I still think
of it as egcs.
The best thing that you can do is ask someone on the gcc mailing
list to explain, or look for an FAQ on the gnu site.
Hope this helps.
TTYL
--
Mike A. Harris Linux advocate
Computer Consultant GNU advocate
Capslock Consulting Open Source advocate
Try out Red Hat Linux today: http://www.redhat.com
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/redhat-6.2/
_______________________________________________
Redhat-devel-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
