Subject: Re: cc, gcc, cpp, g++, c++ symlinks
To: None <>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 10/15/2003 17:07:01
> > It would be useful if there was some pkgsrc option to create symlinks for
> > cc, gcc, cpp, g++, c++, et cetera.

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, David S. wrote:
> Won't such a feature be subsumed by "package views"?

I don't think pkgviews creates symlinks for files that don't exist in the
first place. (/usr/pkg/bin/cc doesn't exist, for example.)

And on Thu, 16 Oct 2003, grant beattie wrote:
> why would you want/need to? multiple compiler packages will overwrite
> each other's symlinks, so I would advise against it.

The mk.conf setting for CC_SYMLINK would not be set to all choices, for

 CC_SYMLINK=	gcc3-c++ # which will include gcc3-c too
 CC_SYMLINK=	gcc3-c++ gcc3-f77 # will also include gcc3-c too
  CC_SYMLINK=	gcc3
 CC_SYMLINK=	gcc # for 2.95.3

If the mk.conf had multiple items providing same files, then it would
conflict. But it should not be used that way.

(I should be more clear on the explanation in the

> > This would be useful for me to make sure I automatically have symlinks for
> > the compiler tools in my PATH (rather than adding /usr/.../gcc3/bin to my
> > execution path).
> if you are referring to building packages, you don't need to do this
> as it's already handled in mk/

This is for end-users (who don't know pkgsrc) that expect a "cc" in their
standard path: "Where is the compiler?"

   Jeremy C. Reed