Messages in this thread | | | From | bogus@pell ... | Subject | Re: GNU/Linux | Date | 6 Apr 1999 17:41:53 -0700 |
| |
In article <linux.kernel.199904060446.AAA05737@rochester.rr.com>, Marty Leisner <leisner@rochester.rr.com> wrote: > [I wrote]
>> Nonsense. GCC may be the best free C compiler out there, but it's >> certainly not the only one and it certainly wasn't the only one in >> 1991. If GCC wasn't around, one of the other free compilers would >> have been suitable for the job,
>I've been actively using free software for more than a dozen years >(since gcc 1.18).
It's getting close to 30 for me; of course, I started using computers when source was pretty universally available, so the lines weren't quite so firmly drawn.
>I know of no other full, free compiler which runs on a variety of popular >processors (MIPS, Sparc, NSxxx, i386, M68xxx, some more).
All Linux needed was a compiler that worked on the ia32 architecture, since that's the architecture that it was originally written on. If gcc wasn't around, who knows what would have happened with, oh, Sozobon C (which was written in 88? 89?), or any of the other C or C-like compilers that were floating around for free.
____ david parsons \bi/ It's a moot point, because RMS seems to be saying now \/ that using glibc gives permission to steal the name.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |