[9fans] Small GCC steps...

[9fans] Small GCC steps...

[lucio]

> Bootstrap complete - make "quickstrap" to redo last build,
> "restage1" through "restage3" to rebuild specific stages,
> or "cleanstrap" to redo the bootstrap from scratch.
> #

I'm hoping at least Ron will have something encouraging to say :-)

It's not that I believe we ought to go this way, but I see the
pragmatic value of GCC and G++.  Maybe I ought to follow brucee's lead
and set up a closed mailing list for interested parties?  I redirect
mail from unknown sources to a folder I inspect irregularly, sometimes
infrequently, although many 9fans are already whitelisted.  I'm not
sure what the best way to get the details from me would be for anyone
else.

++L

PS: The next step is to try this on GCC 4.2.3 unless somebody has a
better idea.

Re: [9fans] Small GCC steps...

[ron minnich]

well, I think this will be useful.

The big challenge is to get it back to the gcc core so we don't have a
full port each time.

ron

Re: [9fans] Small GCC steps...

[lucio]

> The big challenge is to get it back to the gcc core so we don't have a
> full port each time.

There's a lot to do.  Just to play catch-up is a bit of a mission,
specially if it's not clear how everything fits together.

I still need to (a) get the APE library ported to GCC, which I presume
I can do with the 3.0 version, there have been significant changes and
some useful files (mkconfig, mksyslib) have not made into the
distribution; (b) identify the changes in GCC 3.0 from its release,
which is also no trivial task; (c) apply the changes to GCC 4.2.3 -
which is the most recent release - and verify that a new release can be
generated successfully.

I then need to go all the way back and try to regenerate GCC 4.2.3 (or
later) from a pristine Plan 9 release, there are always odd bits that
sneak into the woodwork (like the mk* files) and only resurface as
problems.

Finally, I need to wrap the whole lot into some reliable mechanism to
reproduce all my efforts with none of the errors.  And don't nobody
say autoconf, right now!  On the other hand, a reliable "config.h"
file for Plan 9 that describes truthfully what does apply to Plan 9
and/or APE would be nice to have.

Sometime in this process I probably need to get a copyright assignment
with the FSF, before I can submit any changes to GCC.  I guess Bell
Labs may have to tackle that aspect, too.

++L