trevor@trevan.uucp (01/01/91)
I have been trying to get libg++ working on SCO Opendesktop. When g++ has compiled the tests test0 core dumps. I would like to know if anyone has these working on SCO. Here are the details gcc 1.37.1 gas 1.36.0 g++ 1.37.1 libg++ 1.37.0 I have tried with and without the gnu-coff patches. With the coff patches gcc works well with gas. I have tried g++ with and without using the ifile. Make_ifile assums a value of 0x400000 if NBPS is not defined. Is this correct for SCO. -- regards trevor trevor@trevan.uucp
mb@ttidca.TTI.COM (Michael Bloom) (01/03/91)
In article <1991Jan01.111531.15463@trevan.uucp> trevor@trevan.uucp writes: >When g++ has compiled the tests test0 core dumps. I would like to Test0 tries to perform incremental loading, using a feature of the berkeley loader that is not present on system 5 systems. If I get the time, I might include a front end to ld that performs this relatively trivial task in a future version of the coff set. Then again, with some recent developments, that may turn out not to be necessary. >With the coff patches gcc works well with gas. I have tried g++ >with and without using the ifile. >Make_ifile assums a value of 0x400000 if NBPS is not defined. Is this >correct for SCO. I've been told that this value works for all 386 based system V systems. On a separate matter, One thing you should take care to be certain of is that libg++ contains the version of gnulib3 that is patched in the g++ directory and that it is compiled with -DUSE_GPLUS_IFILE. Not including an extra copy of the patch for use in the libg++ directory was an oversight on my part that has tripped up a number of people (although some had it figured out by the time my email reply had reached them). The change in the patched version is necessary in order for the global constructors and destructors to get called.
james@bigtex.cactus.org (James Van Artsdalen) (01/04/91)
In <22319@ttidca.TTI.COM>, mb@ttidca.TTI.COM (Michael Bloom) wrote: | Make_ifile assums a value of 0x400000 if NBPS is not defined. Is this | correct for SCO. > I've been told that this value works for all 386 based system V systems. What value is this, the start of .data space? If so, no, that value is not correct for all 386 systems. SysVr4 puts .data somewhere else. -- James R. Van Artsdalen james@bigtex.cactus.org "Live Free or Die" Dell Computer Co 9505 Arboretum Blvd Austin TX 78759 512-338-8789
rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) (01/13/91)
In article <22319@ttidca.TTI.COM> mb@ttidca.TTI.COM (Michael Bloom) writes: >In article <1991Jan01.111531.15463@trevan.uucp> trevor@trevan.uucp writes: > >>When g++ has compiled the tests test0 core dumps. I would like to > >Test0 tries to perform incremental loading, using a feature of the >berkeley loader that is not present on system 5 systems. That statement should be ammended to say "... on PRE-SVR4 System 5 systems." In SVR4 you get dynamic loading. >If I get the >time, I might include a front end to ld that performs this relatively >trivial task in a future version of the coff set. Then again, with >some recent developments, that may turn out not to be necessary. I'm not 100% sure what "recent developments" Michael Bloom is refering to, but perhaps he is talking about System 5 Release 4. Considering hom many improvements V.4 has over older System V releases, I certainly hope and pray that people will not spend an inordinate amount of time (from now on) trying to make GNU tools do clever things (e.g. dynamic loading) on older System V releases. All such work will be man-hours down the drain before too long. -- // Ron Guilmette - C++ Entomologist // Internet: rfg@ncd.com uucp: ...uunet!lupine!rfg // Motto: If it sticks, force it. If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.
6sigma2@polari.UUCP (Brian Matthews) (01/18/91)
In article <3326@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette) writes: |Considering |hom many improvements V.4 has over older System V releases, I certainly |hope and pray that people will not spend an inordinate amount of time |(from now on) trying to make GNU tools do clever things (e.g. dynamic |loading) on older System V releases. All such work will be man-hours |down the drain before too long. This is assuming that everyone has - the money to purchase SVR4, and - either a powerful enough machine or the money to buy a powerful enough machine to run SVR4, and - a vendor that supports their machine or the money to buy a new machine that runs SVR4. I hardly think this is a given. -- Brian L. Matthews 6sigma2@polari.UUCP
wengland@stephsf.stephsf.com (Bill England) (01/24/91)
In article <3185@polari.UUCP> 6sigma2@polari.UUCP (Brian Matthews) writes: > >This is assuming that everyone has > > - the money to purchase SVR4, and > - either a powerful enough machine or the money to buy a powerful > enough machine to run SVR4, and > - a vendor that supports their machine or the money to buy a new > machine that runs SVR4. > >I hardly think this is a given. No. It is indeed not a given. In fact SCO's-ODT package 1.1 will only include a Sys V 3.2 OS. I have no idea what their schedule for releasing a 4.0 product is but, I get the impression that I shouldn't hold my breath. :-) I'm curious about when SCO's-ODT will include X11R4 as well? -- Anyway, is it possible to get g++, and libg++ running on Sys V.3.1 ? (SCO-ODT 1.0) Has anyone even tried? I believe that current g* versions are; gcc 1.39 (released by RMS last week) gas 1.37 g++ 1.37.1 -- +- Bill England, wengland@stephsf.COM -----------------------------------+ | * * H -> He +24Mev | | * * * ... Oooo, we're having so much fun making itty bitty suns * | |__ * * ___________________________________________________________________|