From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <1d5d51400604071201n5f308eeco519feb9d76023d62@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 03:01:10 +0800 From: "Fernan Bolando" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Good enough approximation for ape/pcc In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <1d5d51400604071113j49a852c2ha88eb828f1a676df@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 32b57b4a-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 4/8/06, Russ Cox wrote: > > this is just to assist me in porting some stuff into my plan9 box > > Just use pcc directly. All the relevant differences are in > #include files, not compiler flags. > did you mean use gcc directly? I am not sure If I understood you correctly but to clarify my original ques= tion. Sometimes when I dont have access to my plan 9 system and my only computer is a linux box I want to check if a piece pf code will compile under ape. is there a way to use gcc so that it will behave more like the ape tools? -- Public PGP/GnuPG key (http://www.fernski.com) pub 1024D/3576CA71 2006-02-02 Fernan Bolando Key fingerprint =3D FDFE C9A8 FFED C1A5 2F5C EFEB D595 AF1C 3576 CA71