Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 11:02:56 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Paolo Di Francesco <paipai@tin.it>, freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: [Ultra] Compiler, again Message-ID: <19981128110256.N468@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <19981126012503.TTRF23855.fep04-svc@winworkstation>; from Paolo Di Francesco on Thu, Nov 26, 1998 at 02:27:21AM %2B0000 References: <199811251911.OAA00633@jhicks.glenatl.glenayre.com>; <19981126110842.D67961@freebie.lemis.com> <19981126012503.TTRF23855.fep04-svc@winworkstation>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday, 26 November 1998 at 2:27:21 +0000, Paolo Di Francesco wrote:
> Greg Lehey wrote:
>> [Format autorecovered at freebie.lemis.com]
>>
>> On Wednesday, 25 November 1998 at 14:11:42 -0500, Jerry Hicks wrote:
>>> Chuck Youse - Icon CMT Network Operations Center wrote:
>>>> Use GNU make.
>>>
>>> Definitely good advice!
>
>> I prefer GNU make to BSD make, but it's still not good advice.
>> FreeBSD uses BSD make, and if we start requiring two different makes
>> to build the product, we're going to have both procedural trouble and
>> lots of resistance from the core team.
>
> Well, onestly I don't know.... Can someone contact a member of the
> freeBSD core team?
Sure, anyone can contact a member of the FreeBSD core team. I'm
copying Jordan on this one, because I'm pretty sure this is an issue
on which the core team will have no differences in opinion.
Jordan, the proposal is to use GNU make instead of BSD make for the
Sparc port. As I said above, I don't agree for political reasons.
Would you like to make a statement?
> Personally I don't think we'll have problems about this. We need
> something to compile our (internal) code to do experiments and to
> build a kernel. We can use Solaris or another
> OperatingSystem+compiler, the important thing is that we must have
> an UltraSparc compiler. If we cannot do compiling using the gcc,
> well we have no choose, we must use egcs.
[Back to the Sparc people]
Don't forget that the other flavours of *BSD also use gcc. The
difference is that they use different Makefiles (which, BTW, are at
least one order of magnitude less complex). Your challenge would be
to modify them, preferably in a manner which wouldn't preclude their
use on other platforms, so that they would also build a Sparc
compiler. So far, the only platform dependency in
/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/Makefile.inc is:
if ${MACHINE_ARCH} != "i386"
BINFORMAT= elf
.else
# Pick aout for now. the elf config is not binary compatable.
BINFORMAT?= aout
#BINFORMAT?= elf
.endif
It seems to me that this wouldn't need changing for Sparc.
> In the future, we can use gcc if it will support UltraSparc, but now
> no egcs no UltraFreeBSD. For the userland maybe we will have more
> problems. Anything will be compiled with egcs if gcc does not
> support Ultra, and this means we cannot distribute sources and the
> compiler, because we must use gcc for the userland. (I think)
There are other messages which suggest that the future is now. I
can't see any reason not to move to 2.8.x if that's what it takes. By
the time the Sparc port gets merged into the main source tree, the
other platforms will probably support it too. In the meantime you
could use the version in ports.
Greg
--
See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers
finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981128110256.N468>