On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:42:47PM -0400, Brad Smith wrote: > > It's not about package maintainers as they know to do the right > > thing. It's > > about end users that don't know any better. In this case someone > > submitted > > a bogus patch which was commited based on using the wrong compiler. > > > > why they do not just use package system ? > > I don't know, but it's beside the point now. All kinds of people for various > reasons (re)build software outside of pre-built packages.
Well, after sleeping over it, I think your points above are valid. We used to support exclusively gcc by extensively using GNU extensions, but over time other compilers like icc, clang, and tcc have adopted a lot of these GNU extensions and are compatible. And it makes sense not to ask them to call themselves gcc of course. So I think we can do this, and that 2.3 is the right version to do it, and it will leave us enough time to see if any issues are reported. In practice I expect the vast majority of systems where development packages are installed to have at least one working "cc". I'm going to take your patch, thanks! Willy
