On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 10:31 AM Clem cole wrote: > By the time of 4.2 the switch from the Ritchie and Johnson compilers at > UCB had begun. Remember the primary output of Rms at that point was emacs > and gcc. > > CSRG wanted the different backends for C. ThAts it. Besides the vax, > Rms had done 68000 and 386 back ends then. > > With the original system V, all of AT&T, Intel and IBM paid Interactive > Systems Corp (aka ISC) to port the System V/Vax code to a 386 ps/2 and an > Intel reference system that used an ISA bus. This would be eventually > released in source at the 386 port from AT&T. As part of the contract > summit supplied the compiler > > I know the AT&T assembler with it’s backwards syntax from Intel was done > before rms did his. He was compatible with the summit assembler. I don’t > remember who’s 386 backend came out first. I think is was the summit > compiler but you needed a system v license which UCB did not have. > There's also a fair amount of work at MIT to do Intel code generation for 8086 (small mode) that was extended by Queens College London (I think, I gotta grab the tapes again) to do large mode. I've run into this looking for a compiler for the Venix source restoration project I've been tilting at. I found those based on a cryptic comment I found somewhere online about the tech behind Venix that wasn't from AT&T. I don't know if ISC started with them as a base or not, nor really how the MIT compilers came about, but they claim to be PCC based somehow. Don't know if this helps you on your quest... BTW, I found these when I found the latest pcc-restoration sources didn't have a working i86 backend anymore (there was once one for Minux, but when I built it I couldn't get it to generate sensible code at all). Warner > Clem > > Sent from my PDP-7 Running UNIX V0 expect things to be almost but not > quite. > > On Jul 11, 2019, at 8:50 AM, Jason Stevens > wrote: > > That would make sense. I was able to find some info on PCC2 here > > http://doc.cat-v.org/unix/unix-before-berkeley/ > > I'm guessing along with the adoption of emacs the csrg must have been > further gnu synergy... Or maybe PCC2 just wasn't available outside of the > labs? > > Or maybe by '88 gcc was already usurping many of the c compilers of the > era. > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 11:37 PM +0800, "Clem cole" wrote: > > I believe the pcc/386 came out of Steve Johnson team at Summit with the >> PCC2 work. >> >> Sent from my PDP-7 Running UNIX V0 expect things to be almost but not >> quite. >> >> On Jul 11, 2019, at 7:53 AM, Jason Stevens < >> jsteve@superglobalmegacorp.com> wrote: >> >> Does anyone know where the 386 port from PCC came from? >> >> >> >> While trying to build a Tahoe userland for the i386, it seems that >> everything was built with GCC… >> >> Was there a PCC for the i386 around ’88-90? It seems after the rapid >> demise of the Tahoe/Harris >> >> HCX-9 that the non Vax/HCX-9 platforms had moved to GCC? >> >> >> >> Also anyone know any good test software for LIBC? I’ve been tracing >> through some >> >> strange issues rebuilding LIBC from Tahoe, where I had to include some >> bits from >> >> Reno to get diropen to actually work. I would imagine there ought to >> have been some >> >> platform exercise code to make sure things were actually working instead >> of say >> >> building as much as you can, and playing rogue for a few hours to make >> sure >> >> its stable enough. >> >>