At 12:50 PM -0500 12/17/01, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 09:18:35AM -0800, paul beard wrote:
>>  On Monday 17 December 2001 06:38 am, Manuel Bouyer opined:
>>  > Well, the compiler may not be the same, which can change a lot of
>>  > things :)
>>
>>  They are the same thing.
>>
>>  (paul@pink)-(09:17 AM / Mon Dec 17)
>>  [/Users/paul]:: uname -a
>>  Darwin pink 5.1 Darwin Kernel Version 5.1: Tue Oct 30 00:06:34 PST 2001;
>>  root:xnu/xnu-201.5.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC  Power Macintosh powerpc
>
>This doesn't say anything about what compiler was used to build the system.
>In point of fact, I don't believe that Apple uses gcc to build their shipped
>binaries; at least not most of them.  They'd have to be fools to do so, since
>gcc is pretty much the worst powerpc compiler you can get and they have
>access to much better ones.

The compiler on Darwin/OSX *is* gcc 2.95.2 with lots of custom stuff 
added.  That's what's on the OSX developer tools distributions and 
that's what Apple uses.  Apple wrote their own linker.  There is 
active development merging in the custom stuff for gcc 3.1.  There is 
a separate public cvs repository for this merge which will continue 
to include the changes that get rejected by FSF.
-- 
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz@jpl.nasa.gov, or hbhotz@oxy.edu