On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 12:50:28PM -0600, Ronald G Minnich wrote: > Roman Shaposhnick wrote: > >On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 10:58:35AM -0700, Corey wrote: > > > >>Two questions - quite likely naive, so please be kind! > >> > >>#1 - How difficult approximately would it be to port a > >>more current release of gcc to plan9, say 4.1? > > > > > > The gcc source code is pretty messy. But let me ask you > > a different question -- what exactly do you want to > > achieve with gcc ? > > > > Let me raise my hand.
By all means :-) > I want to run MPQC, which can not ever be compiled with 8c. So, is it mostly a backend or a frontend problem ? > Or one of about 1,000 other apps that need gcc. Could you, please, elaborate on what exactly these apps need from gcc ? > Port one app, solve it once. Port gcc, solve it 1,000 times. I don't really think that with a difference in evironment between Linux and Plan9 the later holds true. > > It might, but IMHO it'll defeat the purpose. > > no, I don't completely agree. We need gcc for general use, period. Sorry, I just fail to see how porting gcc would help. Hence to make this discussion a bit more concrete could you, please, be more specific about what exact gcc functionality do you think would be beneficial to native Plan9 ? Thanks, Roman.
