From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <48959629.9080303@fh-lausitz.de> Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 13:27:37 +0200 From: "bblochl@fh-lausitz.de" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] a question on style Topicbox-Message-UUID: fa372f22-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Pietro Gagliardi schrieb: > On Aug 1, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Steve Simon wrote: > >>> OK, am I just out of date or is there a real reason for linker >>> sets? >> >> I see it this way: >> >> using linker sets means you have to learn and understand the linkers >> language >> to understand how the system is configured (when trying to track down >> a problem) >> >> using a bit of script to generate some tables of C code you just need to >> know C. >> >> This combined with the theroy that there is too much to learn and the >> less new stuff >> I need to learn to get a job done the better makes the choice easy >> (IMHO). >> >> -Steve >> > > Plus, linker sets are nonportable. I don't see 8l supporting them, so > I don't think we'll be using them... but all the world uses GCC > nowadays, so why bother with portability anymore? > > > Beside all that different opinions - I don`t want to meddle - there is a port of gcc for plan9 on http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/extra/gcc/. Never tried it. Regards BB