Subject: Re: Can we trim the fat from gcc3, please?
To: Frederick Bruckman <>
From: grant beattie <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 06/22/2003 14:22:01
On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 12:07:15PM -0500, Frederick Bruckman wrote:

> By the way, any idea why we're keeping gcc-2 and pgcc around? Doesn't
> gcc-3 do it all, and do it better?

it is far more bloated in terms of size on disk and memory footprint
than gcc2, and therefore inappropriate for some systems.