Subject: Re: Can we trim the fat from gcc3, please?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: None <email@example.com>
Date: 06/16/2003 07:42:14
> Then you could go the other way: let gcc3 (by default) build everything,
> and have a GCC3_LANGUAGES_MINIMAL yes/no variable that (1) turns off all but
> c/c++/f77, and (2) turns on NO_BIN_ON_* to prevent packaging in the bulk
> case. I'd rather see the binary package as an "everything" gcc3, and not
> even have a binary package in the bulk build for the stripped-down version.
These are the two entries in mk.conf that I've created to enable me to
build gcc3 with support for the languages required here.
# Path to ADA compiler.
# Possible: Any valid pathname
GCC3_LANGUAGES= c, c++, ada
# A comma seperated list of languages supported by gcc3. Supported languages
# are ada, c, c++, f77, java, objc. All available languages will be configured
# if no value is given.
# Possible: ada, c, c++, f77, java, objc
If default is empty, gcc3 will build all supported languages, including ada
if a suitable ada compiler is found. Alternatively, set the default value
to the languages that are desired for a standard installation.
Once again, I believe that we should support all languages if NetBSD
is not to stay a "Kernel Hackers" only operating system.