On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:08:54 +0000 (GMT), David Brownlee <abs@NetBSD.org>
wrote:
> > Doesn't that get you the obsolete gcc-3.3, in "lang/gcc3", rather than
> > gcc-3.3.2 from "lang-gcc-c" &c?

Does "lang-gcc-c" mean "lang/gcc-c"?  

> 	I was thinking about the one from the lang/gcc3 package. It would
> 	probably make sense to update lang-gcc-c and lang-gcc-c++ too...
> 
> 	If I wanted to compile both C & C++ programs in gcc3 then the
> 	'new' way to be to install gcc3-c++ and gcc3-c?

I'd like to point out that most of the DESCR files are identical:  

$ ls -l gcc*/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 root      wheel  835 Oct 31  2001 gcc-ssp/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 root      wheel  592 Oct 31  2001 gcc/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 jklowden  wheel  591 Jul  6  2003 gcc3-ada/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 jklowden  wheel  591 Jul  6  2003 gcc3-c++/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 jklowden  wheel  591 Jul  6  2003 gcc3-c/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 jklowden  wheel  591 Jul  6  2003 gcc3-f77/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 jklowden  wheel  591 Jul  6  2003 gcc3-java/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 jklowden  wheel  591 Jul  6  2003 gcc3-objc/DESCR
-rw-r--r--  1 jklowden  wheel  591 May 25  2003 gcc3/DESCR

I'm not sure how someone not on this list would understand the purpose of
all the gcc packages.  (I'm not sure, even after reading this thread, what
to do if I want the latest C & C++ compilers.  I don't particularly care
about compilation speed or installed file size/count, but I do want to
avoid subtle gotchas building packages.  I would like to use gcc 3.3.2,
because anything less won't digest some of my C++ templates.)  

--jkl