From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
To: Jim Wilson <wilson@cygnus.com>
Cc: hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu), egcs@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: testing consistency 
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 15:01:00 -0000
Message-id: <26525.874015225@hurl.cygnus.com>
References: <199709112036.NAA08062@cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 1997-09/msg00455.html

  In message < 199709112036.NAA08062@cygnus.com >you write:
  > No, it has been a standard part of gcc for quite a while.
I think I'm going to puke...

Good thing it wasn't for any system I regularly work on.

  > 	Having gcc install itself into /usr seems absolutely and horribly
  > 	wrong to me.  I won't install that patch.
  > 
  > Consider what happens if HP sends you a compiler upgrade for your HP machine  > .
  > Does it go into /usr/local?  No.  It goes in /usr.
HP is shipping me a _binary_.

That's very different from someone picking up egcs/gcc source on the
net and _building_ it.  As much as we'd like to think it's a simple
process people manage to goof far too often.

  > There are two considerations here.  Developers playing with gcc snapshots,
  > and end users trying to upgrade their compiler to the new version.  A
  > developer would not want to install into /usr, because a snapshot bug might
  > break your system.  On the other hand, an end user must install into /usr,
  > otherwise, they haven't actually upgraded the compiler on their system.
  > 
  > Since these are contrary goals, we must choose which one is not the default.
  > It is generally preferable to make things harder for the developer, since
  > they are expected to be able to deal with any problems.  Also, we don't want
  > to tell Linux people that they need to apply patches before they can install
  > gcc correctly.  Hence, installs into /usr should be the default.
I agree with most of your general thoughts, particularly who to
make things harder on.

However, I still find the idea of gcc installing itself into
/usr by default repulsive.

  > This particular issue incidentally has been debated before among the gcc2
  > developers.  I don't see any particular need to reopen the issue.
Well, just because gcc2 does something doesn't mean we have to.


Now, having said all that, I'm not going to argue the issue anymore;
Jim if you want, go ahead and install the patch.  I won't object.

I'll do it myself if other linux folks speak up in favor of
the patch to install egcs into /usr by default.

jeff