lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [OT] Re: Troll Tech [was Re: Sco vs. IBM]
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 09:10:10PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 11:40:33AM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 07:45:21PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > > That's probably a good enough test case. Explain to me how your support
> > > > contracts are ever going to provide enough money to redo GCC or build
> > > > something equally substantial.
> > >
> > > [incremental changes given as example]
> >
> > Incremental changes != redo. Redo is a ~$10M project.
>
> You are of course aware of the fact that gcc is already a testimony to
> the fact that such a compiler can be made from scratch, aren't you?

Aware of it, and friends with the founders of cygnus, the people who did it.
I'm also aware of their finances and what it took and they are partially
the basis for my point of view. GCC doesn't invalidate my case, it makes it.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.125 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site