DragonFly BSD
DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2004-07
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: NO_OBJC patch

To: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "R. Joseph Wright" <joseph@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 18:51:32 -0700

Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:

I left this out because I wanted to get buildworld working first.
The interesting question are:
a) Are this options (NO_OBJC and NO_FORTRAN) in use?
b) If you use them, do you prefer a compiler without the support or only
without the libs / frontends?

The code is intentionally structured to allow the full removal of all
parts, I'm just not sure wether we want this. Don't waste the time with
a NO_CXX or NO_CPP option, the former doesn't work because we do use C++
in our tree (groff!) and the later just isn't worth the effort for
GCC 3.4.


I guess if you axed those options I wouldn't be too sad. I only use them because I have a system which is fairly low on resources and it speeds up my build time if I don't include them. Plus I don't use them.
What do you mean by a compiler without the support? I don't understand how the compiler is structured exactly, I just assumed that if you didn't include the libs and frontends that's all there was to it.

(\_/)   Joseph
(o,o)  Those are my principles.  If you don't like them I have others.
()_()   --Groucho Marx
 " "

[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]