Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bunda
From: bunda@cs.utexas.edu (John Bunda)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: GNU c and c++ under MINIX
Summary: stop this
Message-ID: <3342@cs.utexas.edu>
Date: 16 Sep 88 15:24:14 GMT
References: <2358@alliant.Alliant.COM> <7656@bcsaic.UUCP> <68536@sun.uucp> <206@dcs.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 20

I have considerable experience with gcc, porting it to an experimental
architecture, and I've seen far too much discussion of what I consider
to be a moot point.  The technical obstacles to getting gcc to run 
under MINIX are so formidable that the protracted discussion we are 
reading here is not really worth continuing.

The availability of the 386 port of gcc should not be in any way mistaken 
for a sign that ports to the IBM PC architecture are at all feasible.  I don't
consider a cross-compiler running on a mainframe or having to buy a 386
class machine to be in the spirit of MINIX or the budgets of most MINIX
users.  If a new compiler is desirable or necessary, I would look elsewhere
before I even attempted to try to shoehorn gcc into a PC.  Not that gcc
isn't a fine piece of work - it's just that it wasn't designed to fit
in the cramped quarters of PC addressability and word size.  Sort of 
like trying to put a V-8 in a Volkswagen.  It's not *impossible*, but 
near enough that it's probably not worth attempting.

John Bunda
METRIC Project
UT Austin             bunda@cs.utexas.edu