[M3devel] pruning m3cc/gcc?

[Tony Hosking]

I personally like having the ability to build C from the same source  
tree.  It's useful for debugging the backend sometimes (looking at the  
equivalent code generated from C).

On 28 Jun 2009, at 23:38, Jay wrote:

>
> I keep thinking of deleting
>
>  m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/intl
>  m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/libgomp
>  m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/libmudflap
>  m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/libssp
>  m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/fixincludes
>  m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/libgcc
>
>
> We don't use any of it.
> Some of these deletions would shorten our build command lines.
> Though some (esp. fixincludes and maybe libgcc) might break the
> shortest configure + make that the "real" cm3 doesn't use but can be  
> useful.
>
>
> I didn't include them in gcc-interix and gcc-apple.
>
>
> But there are two possible contradictory goals:
>
>
> - just have what we use/change
> - have a complete merged gcc tree from which you
>   could build gcc/cc1 and not just cm3cg
>   Except we don't have C++, Java, Ada, Fortran,
>   so we don't really have this, but C probably counts for something.
>
>
> If the second is the goal, don't delete.
> If the first is the goal, delete.
>
>
> There is also "having it all there in case it is needed
> or somesuch", but that's easy enough to get elsewhere.
>
>
> - Jay

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20090629/67f28437/attachment-0002.html>