From owner-freebsd-sparc Sat Nov 28 08:34:21 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA24441 for freebsd-sparc-outgoing; Sat, 28 Nov 1998 08:34:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from fep02-svc.tin.it (mta02-acc.tin.it [212.216.176.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA24427 for ; Sat, 28 Nov 1998 08:34:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from paipai@box4.tin.it) Received: from winworkstation ([212.216.234.101]) by fep02-svc.tin.it (InterMail v4.0 201-221-105) with SMTP id <19981128163401.QZAF16980.fep02-svc@winworkstation>; Sat, 28 Nov 1998 17:34:01 +0100 Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Paolo Di Francesco" To: Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 17:36:27 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [Ultra] Compiler, again References: <7427.912220688@zippy.cdrom.com> In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.53/R1) Message-Id: <19981128163401.QZAF16980.fep02-svc@winworkstation> Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Alfred said: > > I want to address several issues that popped up so far today... w3rd > > --- > > The issue about cross compiling, i'm seriously thinking of installing > ultraP to make cross compiling an almost non-issue. Since their > compiler/toolchain work all that is needed is the small patch given to me > via email to get gcc to produce what would become FreeBSD-sparc64 friendly > code. > Why not? If you have enough room on your HD then install it! I think we have to start from something. But Jakub Jelinek pointed out that we need a better sparc64 compiler. I agree with this, but if we can do the port without putting our hands in the compiler I think the "better sparc64 compiler" will wait. Sorry. So, in the weekend please do these things for me (us): 1) try to install UltraP on your UltraSparc, and tell us if it works, and if you think it's a solution for the cross-compiling vs compiling problem. If it is we continue on UltraP and abandon every cross-compiling project. 2) Do some test on UltraP. If you install it try to build something (the kernel, or programs) so we can know if it's stable enough. I know it's stupid to think if it builds the kernel it will work for us, but it's a test, a stupid test, but a test. 8) I would do these things by myself, but I have no Ultra, so... I can try to build a cross-compiler for Ultra (host i386, target Ultra) but it does not seem a good idea. I have read the install file and it does not seem so easy, expecially if you have no Ultra to test if it works... 8( However I'll try to build something and Monday I'll tell you what I have done. I'll start from gcc2.8 (I know it's not stable), or egcs1.1b (Again I know, it's not so good) but I'll try. What I want to obtain is a cross-compiler (as I said host i386, target Ultra) but then I need the linker and the assember.... 8( About a "better sparc64 compiler": if we cannot use a gcc compiler, or an egcs compiler, or "XYZ" compiler, I think we must improve gcc and do the Sparc64 compiler. Sorry, this is the situation. I don't know if someone is interested in this.... 8( > -- > > Which gcc/egcs probably the one that comes with ultraP, we are striving > for correctness and egcs is supposedly VERY broken for usparc64, even > though i've annoyed the lists about gcc2.8.1 i think for consistancy's > sake we should try to use 2.7.2.2 if there are patches to get it to > generate correct asm code. > Hum... Ok. But we have to fix this. We have to decide what to use, so everyone can download the right package from Internet. Ciao Ciao Paolo Di Francesco _ ->B<- All Recycled Bytes Message ... ~ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message