From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <536ceb1c6c20a0fe16e9c2c3feab15a2@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Date: Fri,  8 Jan 2010 06:17:27 +0200
From: lucio@proxima.alt.za
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [9fans] More on the GO toolchain
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b8748dee-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Let me bore most of you in the hope that there are interested
parties...

So far I have compiled the assemblers, linkers and compilers for 386,
amd64 and arm from the GO toolchain, seemingly successfully.  I have
used the freshly acquired sheevaplug to check, at least to some
extent, that this applies to the arm and, naturally, most of the work
is being done on 386 equipment.

I have then compiled the native Plan 9 libraries, libc and libbio,
using the freshly generated tools.  I have had a bit of a setback in
this compilation and I'm writing this while taking a breather, I'll be
going back to fix this last problem next.

One of the issue I need to fix, further, is that the 386 linker (at
least) demands to access the runtime module (runtime.a - I am not yet
ready to build this library) and I wonder if there are any suggestions
here on how best to eliminate this mandatory requirements without
jeopardising compatibility between the GO toolchain and its ability to
"replace" the native Plan 9 toolchain - which is my primary objective
at this point.

Mail me off list if you are interested in the details.  I have
submitted some GO source changes to Russ personally, but I have a
feeling he has overlooked them, maybe this will remind him.  I have
more changes I would like to see incorporated in the GO sources to
save me laborious adjustments every time a new release takes place.

++L