Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!udel!mmdf From: Postmaster%EBRUPC51.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (PMDF Mail Server) Newsgroups: comp.os.minix Subject: Undeliverable mail Message-ID: <4288@louie.udel.EDU> Date: 28 Sep 88 14:51:46 GMT Sender: mmdf@udel.EDU Lines: 65 The message could not be delivered to: Addressee: EAMATEO Reason: %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user EAMATEO at node GAUDI ---------------------------------------- Received: from JNET-DAEMON by EBRUPC51; Wed, 28 Sep 88 15:23 N Received: From EB0UB011(MAILER) by EBRUPC51 with Jnet id 4075 for EAMATEO@EBRUPC51; Wed, 28 Sep 88 15:21 N Received: by EB0UB011 (Mailer X1.25) id 8989; Wed, 28 Sep 88 15:20:49 HOE Date: Tue, 27 Sep 88 14:47:58 GMT From: Rob McMahonSubject: Re: GNU c and c++ under MINIX Sender: Minix operating system To: NACHO NAVARRO Reply-to: INFO-MINIX@UDEL.EDU Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was info-minix-request@UDEL.EDU Comments: To: info-minix@UDEL.EDU In article <1720001@hpqtdla.HP.COM> rana@hpqtdla.HP.COM (Rana Raychoudhury) writes: > "The main goal of GNU CC was to make a god, fast compiler for machines in > the class that the GNU system aims to run on: 32-bit machines that address > 8-bit bytes and have several general registers........" > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Whilst GCC would like to use several registers, and much of its optimization effort goes into allocating registers well, this doesn't mean it wouldn't work on a machine with fewer registers. > "GNU CC does not contain machine dependent code, but it does contain code > that depends on machine parameters such as endianness (whether ths most > significant byte has the highest or lowest address of the bytes in a word) > and the availability of autoincrement addressing......" > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The code that depends on such features is all #ifdef'ed, it doesn't *require* such features, it just uses them if they're available. There are certainly machines without auto-increment that run GCC (I'm on one now), and it runs on machines of both types of endianness. > Now, porting gcc to *minix* may not be a problem per se, but running gcc on > machines without certain features (above) will be. From the text above, it > would appear that porting gcc to Intel 80X8X architectures MAY be > difficult. The problems you cite are not the real problems, I should think the problem is going to be: cudcv (53) %> size /usr/local/lib/gnu/gcc/cc1 text data bss dec hex 417792 40960 21744 480496 754f0 Sun-3 581632 16384 18752 616768 96940 SPARC 655360 49152 13920 718432 af660 Gould cudcv (54) %> (cc1 is the compiler pass, this is on a Sun-3) Rob -- UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!warwick!cudcv PHONE: +44 203 523037 JANET: cudcv@uk.ac.warwick ARPA: cudcv@warwick.ac.uk Rob McMahon, Computing Services, Warwick University, Coventry CV4 7AL, England