Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!uw-beaver!milton!dali.cs.montana.edu!rpi!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!midway!msuinfo!kira!hendrick From: hendrick@kira.uucp (Kenneth J. Hendrickson) Newsgroups: comp.os.minix Subject: cross compiling Message-ID: <1990Sep26.034327.20714@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> Date: 26 Sep 90 03:43:27 GMT References: <27242@usc.edu> <144@pdxgate.UUCP> Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu Reply-To: kjh@usc.edu (Kenneth J. Hendrickson) Organization: EE-Systems, USC, Los Angeles Lines: 27 In article <144@pdxgate.UUCP> kirkenda@eecs.UUCP (Steve Kirkendall) writes: % However: Some people have copied the Minix #include files and libraries to % (for example) DOS, recompiled the Minix libraries using a DOS compiler such % as Turbo-C, and then recompiled the kernel and/or utilities. This gives you % a Minix program that is stored in DOS format. Programs do exist to convert % this to Minix format -- for the PC and ST, at least. % % PC people do this because the Minix-PC compiler is dreadfully slow, and it % generates bulky, inefficient code. ST people *DON'T* do this much, because % the 68000 compiler runs faster, and bulky code is no problem. If I spend the bucks to replace my non-80386 motherboard with a 80386, can I do this? Specifically, I want to: * Compile under MSDOS with Microsoft C, perhaps using floating point, and perhaps using the Math Co-Processor chip, definitely using 386 support (generating 386 code). * Convert to a.out format, and run it (whatever: kernel, editors, etc.) on Minix. * Break the 64k + 64k barrier. * Have fast-running, efficient, code. -- Ken Hendrickson N8DGN/6 kjh@usc.edu ...!uunet!usc!pollux!kjh