rrr@naucse.UUCP (Bob Rose ) (08/10/88)
Well, after a few late nights of hacking I have gotten
gdb (that's the gnu debugger) up and running on my 3b1 (v3.51)
The diffs are good size (but nothing is to big for the net 8*)
and real ugly (I was not a happy camper when I did some of it.)
The question is how many of you can get gdb from version 18.50
of emacs. (Why does he ship it out packed inside of emacs???)
How many of you what the diff's, any objections to posting them
compressed and uuencoded (it saves about 25%)??
-bob
BTW there are some bugs but I can pinpoint you where to start looking.james@bigtex.uucp (James Van Artsdalen) (08/11/88)
In article <833@naucse.UUCP>, rrr@naucse.UUCP (Bob Rose ) wrote: > How many of you what the diff's, any objections to posting them > compressed and uuencoded (it saves about 25%)?? Yes, I object to compressing & uuencoding! It doesn't save any space where it counts: it takes *more* space. News transfer between machines is almost universally compressed (big exception is nntp). If you compress & uuencode something you post, particularly if it is text, you'll take up about 25% or more space (try it out - compress is better than compress|uuencode|compress). -- James R. Van Artsdalen ...!uunet!utastro!bigtex!james "Live Free or Die" Home: 512-346-2444 Work: 328-0282; 110 Wild Basin Rd. Ste #230, Austin TX 78746
wilkes@mips.COM (John Wilkes) (08/12/88)
In article <5171@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> loci@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (loci!clb) writes: > Also, since the gnu stuff always makes the stats for > least popular groups, are you sure anyone cares? Do you refer to the gnu.* groups on Usenet? I think that's a separate issue. > Assuming that people do care (about gnu), please tell me why. > I'm curious to know what attracts users to it. Yes, I care about GNU. First of all, I began using the emacs editor when it was Teco-based and ran only on PDP-10's. At this point in my life, I am too set in my ways to use anything else. Of course, choice of editor is a very personal (and religious for some) decision. As for the specific case of gcc and gdb on 3B1 machines, I don't think that AT&T is going to be putting much effort into cc and sdb for us, do you? I suspect that the gnu compiler and debugger will be much better supported. I'd wager that there are an order of magnitude more people working on gcc and gdb than there are working on the 3B1 versions of cc and sdb. I have seen suggestions that gcc generates better code than the pcc-based C compiler supplied by AT&T for the 3B1 (admitedly not hard to do). Also, I have not heard anything about c++ being available on the 3B1, but we will be able to get g++. And it will cost much less than equivilent software from AT&T ;-). AT&T did not give me the source code for cc and sdb on my 3B1; source for gcc/gdb is readily available. For free. I don't know what I'd do with the source, but maybe I can learn something from it. I like having it available. At the very least, I can apply patches as they come out and stay current. Finally, I am in general agreement with Richard Stallman's philosophy regarding software, and it makes me feel good to use stuff from FSF. But I digress into religious topics. These newsgroups are no longer appropriate for this discussion, where should it go? away? ;-) ;-) > CLBrunow - KA5SOF > Loci Products, POB 833846-131, Richardson, Texas 75083 > clb@loci.uucp, loci@killer.uucp, loci@csccat.uucp -- -- work: {decwrl ames pyramid prls}!mips!wilkes -OR- wilkes@mips.com
gmark@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Stewart) (08/12/88)
In article <833@naucse.UUCP>, rrr@naucse.UUCP (Bob Rose ) writes: > Well, after a few late nights of hacking I have gotten > gdb (that's the gnu debugger) up and running on my 3b1 (v3.51) Hey, what's good about the gnu debugger? How's it compare to that sdb? I've been looking for a nice debugger with more features than that. Thanks for ANY info.! - Mark G. Mark Stewart ATT_BTL, Naperville, Ill. ix1g266 ixlpq!gms (312)979-0914 (include phone if response desired)
james@bigtex.uucp (James Van Artsdalen) (08/12/88)
In article <5171@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>, loci@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (loci!clb) said: > Also, since the gnu stuff always makes the stats for > least popular groups, are you sure anyone cares? The gnu groups are in a separate toplevel name grouping: gnu.gcc, gnu.emacs, gnu.g++ (C++) and so forth. That means they don't propogate across most groups where people only list the Magnificant Seven groups (comp, news, misc, sci, rec, soc, talk) and sometimes alt. Lastly, the groups tend to carry rather technical things like pathes to the compiler and so forth, which practically by definition isn't of general interest. > Assuming that people do care (about gnu), please tell me why. > I'm curious to know what attracts users to it. Well, GNU C generates significantly better code than PCC. And if you're so inclined, you've got source and can add peephole optimizations or other improvements. And you can use it as a cross compiler (ever look at prices for commercial cross compilers?). It is a truly ANSI C, whereas PCC isn't even close. This last point is most telling for some people. And the GNU people have C++ running, which just isn't available yet on most machines. And finally, you generally get better support from the GNU people *iff* you can send in reasonable bug reports. I've never even seriously considered tracking down who in AT&T to report PCC bugs to. -- James R. Van Artsdalen ...!uunet!utastro!bigtex!james "Live Free or Die" Home: 512-346-2444 Work: 328-0282; 110 Wild Basin Rd. Ste #230, Austin TX 78746
andys@genesis.ATT.COM (a.b.sherman) (08/14/88)
In article <5918@bigtex.uucp> james@bigtex.UUCP (James Van Artsdalen) writes: > >And finally, you generally get better support from the GNU people *iff* >you can send in reasonable bug reports. I've never even seriously >considered tracking down who in AT&T to report PCC bugs to. Compiler bugs (and other bugs in the UNIX(R) Operating System) may be reported to a hotline number. (I'm at home and don't have the number handy). Note that you are only entitled to hotline support if you are not the registered owner of an appropriate software license. Like Stallman, we support our software. From the traffic I've seen on the net, folks who have actually *bothered* to call for support (rather than just complain about how bad it is) have received fairly prompt attention. Unlike Stallman, we do not believe that it is evil to charge money for the fruits of our R&D. The money that pays my salary comes from stockholders. They have a right to expect that the company will recover their investment in product development by *selling* products at a *profit*. (Oh horrors, profit. What next, vivisection?) AT&T R&D used to be given away for free, (as in the transistor, the laser, etc.) but divestiture changed all that. -- (By the way, UNIX is a registered trademark of AT&T. Telling you that keeps the lawyers happy :-) ) -- andy sherman / at&t bell laboratories (medical diagnostic systems) room 2e-108 / 185 monmouth pkwy / west long branch, nj 07764-1394 (201) 870-7018 / andys@shlepper.ATT.COM ...The views and opinions are my own. Who else would want them?
gmark@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Stewart) (08/15/88)
In article <2770@electron.mips.COM>, wilkes@mips.COM (John Wilkes) writes: > As for the specific case of gcc and gdb on 3B1 machines, I don't think that > AT&T is going to be putting much effort into cc and sdb for us, do you? I > suspect that the gnu compiler and debugger will be much better supported. ... > having it available. At the very least, I can apply patches as they come > out and stay current. I just got info from Mike Bloom (thanks, Mike) lauding gdb. Now, the question is, how do I get it, and can I use it just like I now do cc and sdb? Thanks in advance! - Mark G. Mark Stewart ATT_BTL, Naperville, Ill. ix1g266 ixlpq!gms (312)979-0914 (please include phone for response)
james@bigtex.uucp (James Van Artsdalen) (08/15/88)
In article <472@genesis.ATT.COM>, andys@genesis.ATT.COM (59228-a.b.sherman) wrote: > In article <5918@bigtex.uucp> james@bigtex.UUCP (James Van Artsdalen) writes: | And finally, you generally get better support from the GNU people *iff* | you can send in reasonable bug reports. I've never even seriously | considered tracking down who in AT&T to report PCC bugs to. > Compiler bugs (and other bugs in the UNIX(R) Operating System) may > be reported to a hotline number. (I'm at home and don't have the > number handy). Note that you are only entitled to hotline support I don't own a Unix-PC at the moment. The bugs I had in mind are in the PCC for uPort/386. In principle it should make no difference I would think, but I doubt that a generic SysV binary license is what your hotline people want. I do think it weird that they don't take bugs from all comers: any serious bug fixing effort would. BTW: RMS's turn-around time on gcc bugs for me in the last week has been about 12 hours. Probably atypical since the 386 gcc support was just released, but it's still vastly better than the last AT&T I ever dealt with much, 3b2 support. > Unlike Stallman, we do not believe that it is evil to charge money > for the fruits of our R&D. [...] I agree that Stallman is something of a nut (albeit a very good and prolific nut). As a software developer, I don't think his schemes would ever work on a large scale. But that doesn't slow me down from using the results of his efforts! -- James R. Van Artsdalen ...!uunet!utastro!bigtex!james "Live Free or Die" Home: 512-346-2444 Work: 328-0282; 110 Wild Basin Rd. Ste #230, Austin TX 78746
slocum@hi-csc.UUCP (Brett Slocum) (08/17/88)
In article <472@genesis.ATT.COM> andys@genesis.ATT.COM (59228-a.b.sherman) writes: >AT&T R&D used to be given away for free, (as in the transistor, the >laser, etc.) but divestiture changed all that. Excuse me, but that changed long before divestiture. And I bet you still publish your R&D in the technical journals, conference proceedings, etc. Besides, AT&T wanted divestiture, since it removed the limitations put on them w.r.t. non-telephone related business. All in all, divestiture has been good for AT&T and not-so-good for the public. And now I see that the old AT&T is starting to get back together: four of the seven mini-Bells (Northwestern, Pacific, Mountain, etc.) are merging into US West Communications. Apparently, some 2 year limitation was imposed by the divestiture, which has now expired. How long will it take before good old Ma Bell is back as one big happy family? -- Brett Slocum UUCP: ...uunet!hi-csc!slocum Arpa: hi-csc!slocum@umn-cs.arpa "My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die."