Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Baby X is bor nagain
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 11:23:05 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <v638qa$251on$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v494f9$von8$1@dont-email.me> <v5cblg$11q0j$1@dont-email.me>
 <gEieO.108089$ED9b.25598@fx11.iad> <20240625113616.000075e0@yahoo.com>
 <mUzeO.141609$Cqra.55051@fx10.iad> <v5elql$1jmii$1@dont-email.me>
 <m3BeO.24907$Gurd.16179@fx34.iad> <v5empd$1jndv$2@dont-email.me>
 <v5eph4$1k6a9$1@dont-email.me> <87ed8jnbmf.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <v5jhls$2m7np$1@dont-email.me> <v5jm32$2nqvp$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5k3v2$2qllm$1@dont-email.me> <v5kfst$2svt3$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5kmlm$2u918$1@dont-email.me> <20240627201830.854@kylheku.com>
 <v5m2nl$39qob$3@dont-email.me> <87msn1l3e5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <v5udks$13tjn$1@dont-email.me> <87bk3flty5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <v61789$1mme1$1@dont-email.me> <87bk3f8hy5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <v625m8$1rn2r$1@dont-email.me> <v62tdl$238cf$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2024 12:23:06 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d3632b7ae21454ea74fd52ce30974ae0";
	logging-data="2262807"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19plsahoAG4VvJZ8OQJdn7s8848cB8DrRQ="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZuC7jjRuuTLSJlzRqgasCLYA4uY=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <v62tdl$238cf$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5401

On 03/07/2024 08:08, David Brown wrote:
> On 03/07/2024 02:23, bart wrote:
>> On 03/07/2024 00:58, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 02/07/2024 16:00, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 01/07/2024 13:09, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Using products like tcc doesn't mean never using gcc. 
>>>>>>>> (Especially on Linux
>>>>>>>> where you will have it installed anyway.)
>>>>>>> The parenthetical remark is wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean it is possible for a Linux installation to not have gcc
>>>>>> preinstalled?
>>>>> I mean that saying "on Linux ... you will have it installed anyway" is
>>>>> wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure, although in the dozen or two versions I've come across, it
>>>>>> always has been.
>>>>> I'm not sure what you mean by a "version".  Every version (in the 
>>>>> sense
>>>>> of release number) of a source-only Linux distribution will have gcc
>>>>> installed, but is that all you mean?  Source-only distributions are 
>>>>> rare
>>>>> and not widely used.
>>>>
>>>> No I mean binary distributions (unless the install process silently
>>>> compiled from source; I've no idea).
>>>
>>> Which ones?
>>>
>>
>> I really, really don't remember. I've tinkered with Linux every so 
>> often for 20, maybe 25 years. You used to be able to order a job-lot 
>> of CDs with different versions. Few did much.
>>
>> Then there were various ones I tried under Virtual Box. All had gcc.
>>
>> I must have tried half a dozen, maybe more, on RPis. Those I know all 
>> had gcc too.  So did a laptop or two with Linux. As does WSL now.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you're trying to do here.
>>
>> I will admit that it might not be 100% certain that a Linux OS on a 
>> system on which someone is planning to run a C compiler will have gcc 
>> installed, although that is not my experience.
>>
>> Will that do?
> 
> In my experience, Linux distributions (which is a much more correct term 
> than your "versions") rarely install gcc by default, unless they are 
> source-based distributions.  But virtually all will have gcc available 
> for easy installation from their repositories.  And they will pull it in 
> automatically if the user installs something that requires it to run, or 
> to install (such as some kinds of drivers that need to be matched to the 
> kernel being used).
> 
> So perhaps instead of insisting, incorrectly, that gcc is almost always 
> installed on Linux, you could just say that gcc is almost always easily 
> available, and move on.  (And perhaps it is so easily installed that you 
> did so without noticing it on your systems.)

I remember exactly the same conversation a few months ago.

When a Windows machine reaches the end of its useful life as a Windows 
machine, I generally convert it to a Linux machine to get a bit more 
service from it, until inevitably it goes for recycling. And so I've 
installed Linux several times. But not recently. I haven't recently 
retired a Windiws machine, though my current machine won't run Windows 
11, and so is due to retire, when I can bring myself to splash a 
thousand pounds or so on a new device.

And of course as a programming person I always want gcc and can't 
imagine a Unix-type system without a commandline C compiler. And I had a 
pretty clear memory that you got gcc by default. But other pepole say 
not, and you check a box as you install. And so I suppose it must be so.

-- 
Check out my hobby project.
http://malcolmmclean.github.io/babyxrc