mra@srchtec.uucp (Michael Almond) (10/23/90)
I've been looking at various versions of Unix and I'm wondering about what they all call the Development Package. What this usually includes is the C compiler and some debugger. With the GNU C compiler around, do you really need the Development Package. I don't know off the top of my head if GNU has a debugger as of yet. I know their are binary versions of GCC running around on SIMTEL20, among other places. Any ideas? --- Michael R. Almond mra@srchtec.uucp (registered) search technology, inc. emory!stiatl!srchtec!mra Atlanta, Georgia (404) 441-1457 (office) .'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. Georgia Tech Alumnus .'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.
cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) (10/23/90)
In article <274@srchtec.UUCP> mra@srchtec.uucp (Michael Almond) writes: > With the GNU C compiler around, do you really need the Development >Package. I don't know off the top of my head if GNU has a debugger as of yet. >I know their are binary versions of GCC running around on SIMTEL20, among >other places. I guess I should add this to the FAQ... The Development system not only includes the c compiler and a debugger, it also includes the libraries with which you have to link to. The FSF does not yet have a library release and even if they do, I don't know if they will be including the system calls and system include files for a particular implementation. The only way to do development is to get the development package and then if you want to, get and use gcc as your compiler. -- Conor P. Cahill (703)430-9247 Virtual Technologies, Inc., uunet!virtech!cpcahil 46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160 Sterling, VA 22170
shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) (10/23/90)
mra@srchtec.uucp (Michael Almond) writes: > With the GNU C compiler around, do you really need the Development >Package. I don't know off the top of my head if GNU has a debugger as of yet. >I know their are binary versions of GCC running around on SIMTEL20, among >other places. Ah, but at least some versions of distributed GNU C assume one has access to various libraries and include files such as are found in standard Development Systems. I had to abandon the effort to install GNU from anomaly on my Open Desktop system since I had no such files.
darcy@druid.uucp (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) (10/24/90)
In article <274@srchtec.UUCP> mra@srchtec.uucp (Michael Almond) writes: > > With the GNU C compiler around, do you really need the Development >Package. I don't know off the top of my head if GNU has a debugger as of yet. >I know their are binary versions of GCC running around on SIMTEL20, among >other places. > Besides the compiler you also need a few other pieces, not the least of which is the libraries. I have the GNU C compiler as well as GNU Make and I needed the ESIX development set as a sub-structure to that. That may change in the future of course as FSF releases more components. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain (darcy@druid) | D'Arcy Cain Consulting | I support gun control. West Hill, Ontario, Canada | Let's start with the government! + 416 281 6094 |
mra@srchtec.UUCP (Michael Almond) (10/24/90)
In article <113@raysnec.UUCP> shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) writes: >mra@srchtec.uucp (Michael Almond) writes: > >> With the GNU C compiler around, do you really need the Development >>Package. > Ah, but at least some versions of distributed GNU C assume one has >access to various libraries and include files. I've gotten quite a few replies about this one. Most people mention that you need cc to get gcc to compile. It shouldn't be a problem to put binaries out on the net for the various PC UNIX's. I think we could come up with the header files, the STD C ones are probably in the public domain. Over a preiod of time we could accumulate the IFDEF for system differences. I guess the only problem would be the libraries. Write this code could take some time. However, someone did come up with the lib's for g++. Any ideas? --- Michael R. Almond mra@srchtec.uucp (registered) search technology, inc. emory!stiatl!srchtec!mra Atlanta, Georgia (404) 441-1457 (office) .'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. Georgia Tech Alumnus .'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.
cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) (10/25/90)
In article <285@srchtec.UUCP> mra@srchtec.UUCP (Michael Almond) writes: > I think we could come up with the header files, the STD C ones are >probably in the public domain. Over a preiod of time we could accumulate the >IFDEF for system differences. The problem with this is the system dependent include files (in /usr/include/sys). To reproduce them we would have to have access to the source (the ones in the development package). Any re-entering of the same data would probably constitute a violation of the copyright on them. > I guess the only problem would be the libraries. Write this code >could take some time. However, someone did come up with the lib's for >g++. Any ideas? Again, the problem (other than time and effort) would be the system calls. We could probably gleam this stuff with some close analysis of the kernel (to avoid any copyright stuff). -- Conor P. Cahill (703)430-9247 Virtual Technologies, Inc., uunet!virtech!cpcahil 46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160 Sterling, VA 22170
jpr@jpradley.uucp (Jean-Pierre Radley) (10/26/90)
In article <274@srchtec.UUCP> mra@srchtec.uucp (Michael Almond) writes: > > I've been looking at various versions of Unix and I'm wondering about >what they all call the Development Package. What this usually includes is the >C compiler and some debugger. > > With the GNU C compiler around, do you really need the Development >Package. I don't know off the top of my head if GNU has a debugger as of yet. >I know their are binary versions of GCC running around on SIMTEL20, among >other places. If I'm not mistaken, there's a "Catch 22" at work here. You can grab the Gnu C compiler source, but in order to to compile the source, you need a compiler... -- Jean-Pierre Radley HIGH-Q jpr@jpradley CIS: 72160,1341
dpi@loft386.uucp (Doug Ingraham) (10/29/90)
In article <274@srchtec.UUCP>, mra@srchtec.uucp (Michael Almond) writes: > With the GNU C compiler around, do you really need the Development > Package. I don't know off the top of my head if GNU has a debugger as of yet. > I know their are binary versions of GCC running around on SIMTEL20, among > other places. > > Any ideas? > This can't be done yet, mostly because you don't have the system dependent libraries unless you buy the Software Development Platform. AT&T would probably take a dim view of borrowing the libraries and include files from someone elses system. I am working on this problem and expect to have a product in a few more months. The biggest holdup is testing and documentation. I have all the SYSTEM(2) functions coded and am working on documentation. After all its also not nice to borrow the documentation either. -- Doug Ingraham (SysAdmin) Lofty Pursuits (Public Access for Rapid City SD USA) uunet!loft386!dpi
dt4100c@medtron.medtronic.com (Derek Terveer) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Oct23.123532.4081@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes: > In article <274@srchtec.UUCP> mra@srchtec.uucp (Michael Almond) writes: > > With the GNU C compiler around, do you really need the Development > >Package. I don't know off the top of my head if GNU has a debugger as of yet. > >I know their are binary versions of GCC running around on SIMTEL20, among > >other places. > > The Development system not only includes the c compiler and a debugger, it > also includes the libraries with which you have to link to. The FSF does > not yet have a library release and even if they do, I don't know if they will > be including the system calls and system include files for a particular > implementation. > > The only way to do development is to get the development package and then if > you want to, get and use gcc as your compiler. Also, there are apparently some software packages around for which it is inadvisable to use gcc as your compiler. For example, in the README file for FAS2.07, it advises against using gcc because (quoting from the README file): The gcc (GNU cc) support was removed because gcc's object file wants to link in some "helpful" functions that aren't contained in the kernel. But anyway, FAS is tuned so carefully and depends on the optimization behaviour of the AT&T standard C compiler that gcc won't have any advantages. derek -- Derek "tigger" Terveer Just the facts, ma'am: det@medtronic.com