On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 08:46:04PM +0300, Chuckk Hubbard wrote: > If you have an OSX system without the installation discs, and you want > to install a free C/C++ compiler, the *only* way I have found is with > a download of several hundred MB from the official OSX website with > *lots* of extra stuff, examples, docs, developer's tools, for many > different languages. Surely won't matter for the majority of people > who would even consider Mac, but *why*? Why on earth would anyone make > that decision?? Especially considering that it's actually GPL software > created by someone else! The installation discs for Mac OS X already contain software licensed under the GNU GPL (e.g. bash), so the additional obligations under the GPL would not have been the reason to exclude a compiler. It seems much more likely that it was the size. Several hundred megabytes that aren't required by most users should always be omitted from the installation discs, so that more room is made for what most users require. The same is done with Ubuntu and Debian installation images. Most of the tools needed to build Ubuntu are not included in the installation image, and require downloading "apt-get build-dep $packagename". -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
