From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <42a5cf15f9ac706d8e137a0da825e221@quanstro.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 19:31:28 -0600
From: quanstro@quanstro.net
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: patch/list applied/ape-dumb-autohell-fixes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: fe7da582-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Mon Feb 13 14:27:01 CST 2006, rminnich@lanl.gov wrote:
> 
> I don't think that there is a PDP-10 port, though that might be closest 
> in some ways: no mmap, no real stuff from post-1981 Unix really, pretty 
> simple interface. GNU supports a rich variety of targets; what one is 
> most like Plan 9? QNX? VXworks? ECOS? Maybe DOS? I am not sure.
> 
[...]
> 
> The reason I wanted to start with gcc 0.9, a few years ago, was that in 
> the early days gcc would compile under just about any OS and C compiler 
> -- the newer gcc's only seem to compile under gcc. So you start with gcc 
> 0.9, get it to build under native plan 9, not APE, then bootstrap your 
> way forward to current. I have no idea if this will work, but I did 
> bootstrap gcc onto a lot of weird machines 15 years ago. It looks much 
> harder, however, to drop gcc 4.0 onto a non-gcc-like C compiler and get 
> it to go!

gcc 1.32 compiled on bsd 4.3 for me back in the day. that should cover 
the "no mmap" etc.

also, perhaps tcc could bootstrap gcc? i know it has been used to compile
the linux kernel, so it should be up to the task on x86-compatables.

- erik