The reason for egcs is that gcc 2.8 was terrible, and was not being maintained. I believe egcs was a fork done of gcc by Cygnus that actually worked. Therefore, many distributions switched to egcs because it optimized better, had better C++ support, and was being maintained better. The Free Software Foundation finally decided that Cygnus was doing a heck of a lot better with their fork that the FSF was doing with their main tree, so the FSF named Cygnus to be the official maintainers of GCC. Therefore, starting with 2.9.5, I think, egcs became gcc again.
People who remember it better, please correct me where I'm wrong. Short answer - egcs is the Cygnus fork, which eventually became the main fork later. Jon On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, [iso-8859-1] Martín Marqués wrote: > Can someone explain to me what are the differences (religious if you want) > between gcc and egcs? Why did RH have gcc, then passed to egcs and now is > back to gcc? > > Saludos... :-) > > P.D.: I'm writing a small paper and got stuck with this issue. > > -- > Porqué usar una base de datos relacional cualquiera, > si podés usar PostgreSQL? > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Martín Marqués | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica > Universidad Nacional > del Litoral > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > Redhat-list mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
