Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id KAA00720
	for pups-liszt; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:40:08 +1100 (EST)
	(envelope-from owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au: major set sender to owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
Received: from moe.2bsd.com (0@MOE.2BSD.COM [206.139.202.200])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA00713
	for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au>; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:40:00 +1100 (EST)
	(envelope-from sms@moe.2bsd.com)
Received: (from sms@localhost)
	by moe.2bsd.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id PAA18529
	for pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au; Sun, 22 Nov 1998 15:31:04 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 15:31:04 -0800 (PST)
From: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-Id: <199811222331.PAA18529@moe.2bsd.com>
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4.3-VAX distributions
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

Hi -

>    The lifting of the filesystem limits is in Tahoe, not in Reno. When you
> talk about the speed of Reno's binaries, what are you comparing it to? I
> know for sure that there are no significant changes in the C compiler
> between plain 4.3, Tahoe, and Reno.
	
	UH, not quite so.  Unless 4.3 and Tahoe used GCC (which they did 
	not).  I'd say that there is a big difference between the 4.3
	C compiler (pcc or whatever it started out as) and GCC.  Tahoe,
	while adding support for the CCI line of computers (tried to
	get folks to buy one but they wouldn't go for it) did NOT use
	GCC (which wasn't out yet or if it was had just started making
	an appearance).  Reno came with GCC though.

	The older pre-Reno compilers (being straight K&R) didn't handle 
	prototypes  - that's what you had "lint" for.  

	Steven Schultz
	sms@Moe.2bsd.com

