Re: Has anyone successfully bootstrapped gcc-4.6.3 on m68k?
On 2012-05-17, at 11:47 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Vaugha Brewchuk dixit:
>
>> The biggest challenge on the NeXT is that the libraries are approx. 20
>> years old. What is there of POSIX, is very broken, and many of the
>> standard c library functions are completely obsolete. So even once a
>> compile is built and works well, many tests tend to fail.
>
> Well, as long as you’re not on OpenStep 4.2 (then you’d better give
> up ☺) it can’t be too bad… RT recently got mksh to build and pass
> its testuite (fully!) on NS3.3 with gcc 2.5.8 ;-)
I actually have OPENSTEP 4.2 as well, but I removed it from the m68k machine and replaced it by NEXTSTEP 3.3. I am a bit of a purist. I have OPENSTEP running on a dedicated Pentium 4 machine however. I was also thinking of putting OPENSTEP back on another m68k NeXT since it introduces support for shared libraries, etc. It does remove POSIX support, but this is really not a big deal since POSIX is quite broken on NS3.3.
> Building mksh and running its testsuite _is_ a good compiler and
> libc test anyway. I’ve suggested the GCC people do that several
> times already… (when you do, make sure to try CVS HEAD)
Interesting, I will definitely look into this. I have been using bash, but I have also been experiencing really bizarre issues with configure scripts that I cannot trace to the root cause - some of the files generated by config.status randomly get null characters inserted into them which then breaks the tools that process them, such as gawk or gcc.
> bye,
> //mirabilos
> --
> FWIW, I'm quite impressed with mksh interactively. I thought it was much
> *much* more bare bones. But it turns out it beats the living hell out of
> ksh93 in that respect. I'd even consider it for my daily use if I hadn't
> wasted half my life on my zsh setup. :-) -- Frank Terbeck in #!/bin/mksh
Reply to: