Re: egcs and linux

[Marc Espie <espie@quatramaran.ens.fr>]

In article < wh1zjtgnwy.fsf@viffer.oslo.metis.no > you write:
>>>>>> Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>:

>> That may be your only concern, but this project is not just a linux
>> compiler.  We have to think about broader scopes than just linux.

>Linux is a _very_ important platform for egcs.  Egcs _really_ should
>be able to work on linux without any patches.  

So get clean patches *in* that won't annoy other architectures.
I'm currently working to get egcs to work with almost no patches on OpenBSD.
Why almost ? because there are philosophical differences, and all the world
is not OpenBSD. Nor Linux. Nor Hurd. I'm always pushing to give my point
of view, especially where I think it matters in the general idea, but I don't
really expect all the sillyness OpenBSD would like to impose on egcs to 
matter, in the end.

>Today 1.1.1 doesn't work properly on linux without H.J.'s patches.

>IMHO 1.1.2 should not be released at all, before it will work on linux
>without patches.

Your opinion doesn't matter. Clean code does.

What's important is to understand differences, and cater for them the 
way they're needed. The day the egcs project starts moving to accommodate
the linux crowd to the detriment of other architectures is the day *I'm*
dropping it.

Besides, who cares about being able to work out of the box without patches ?
This is a technical area. People who know what the patches fix will know how
where to get them, or what to patch themselves. Heck, I've asked enough silly
questions on this ml recently to be dead sure I was doing things the right
way...