Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 15th Jun 2011 14:23 UTC, submitted by Valhalla
Permalink for comment 477511
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-02-17
Didn't say it was ... I was merely stating that I don't expect the BSDs to use this because of the license. Also I also suspect it probably doesn't run on all the platforms that they support ... i.e. m68k, SPARC, SPARC64. So I would imagine that this would end up being distributed as a optional component i.e. a package.
I know. "
If it is possible to use a compiler for 64-bit the x86_64 architecture which gives a considerable performance boost, why wouldn't the BSD developers use it to build their BSD distribution? What exactly would be their problem?
As I understand it, BSD distributions have even shipped GCC in the past, which is GPL-licensed. Surely not using a good option for one of your supported platforms such as the EKOPath 4 compiler (even if you don't ship it) just because it has a GPL license is simply a rather obvious case of cutting your nose to spite your face.
Edited 2011-06-17 11:00 UTC