From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: LyricalNanoha@dosius.net (Lyrical Nanoha) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:41:38 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Redoing "V6on286" or porting V7...? In-Reply-To: <20051114194946.GE6574@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> References: <20051113201609.GW6574@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <8a61b612cf43394f33e6531339fe4263@coraid.com> <20051114194946.GE6574@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> Message-ID: I'm the original poster of this thread. On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Peter Jeremy wrote: > Wesley Parish mentioned bcc and OpenWatcom. I looked into the former > and it's probably the best starting point (though, with due respect to > BDE, the code it generates could be better). Assuming that Unix fits > into the C subset implemented by bcc, you'd be better off spending the > effort on improving bcc than porting PCC. At the time I looked, > OpenWatcom was either still vapourware or not self-hosting. I don't think everything needs to be bootstrapped with an open-source compiler. I have Turbo C++ 1.01 which is a more than adequate C compiler for anything I've done with it (ranging from clones of Unix tools to a COMMAND.COM to an Apple //e emulator). Whatever does the job is fine for me. So getting the kernel up and getting files in and out of the image until a native C compiler is ready (pcc?) can be done with anything, practically. QEMU is a good enough testbed, and gives you well-defined hardware. Once everything is up and running, then maybe one can migrate on to newer systems (V7, 2BSD), though V6 should be simple enough as a starting point, provided most of it is in C (I haven't really looked). -uso.