ld-elf related problems

[Ruben de Groot]

On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:18:11PM +1100, alex typed:
> b. f. wrote:
> >Our base system compiler suite is stuck at a patched version of gcc
> >4.2 because of licensing issues
> Thats absolutely *ridiculous* that we have to use stone age development 
> tools because of stupid and trivial license politics.

- Calling it ridiculous does not make the licencing problem go away.
- The base-system compiler is there to compile the base system.
- There's plenty of development tools in ports.
- gcc 4.2.x isn't exactly "stone age". (I'm still administering some HP-UX
boxes with gcc 2.95 on them. It's old, but compiles pretty workable code.)

> Is this the reason why people are pushing for llvm, just to avoid the 
> GPL license type of later releases of the gnu c compiler and tools? 
> Thats really sad. llvm has a long way to go before it can be considered 
> a worthy competitor against gcc.

I think it is, and I share your concern. But really, the gcc people made
their choice and we have to live with it.

> Linux is going to leave us for dust at this rate.

So? It's just an OS. Some will switch to linux and try to make that better.
Thats evolution.