On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 02:13:48PM -0600, Ronald G Minnich wrote: > Roman Shaposhnick wrote: > > > So, is it mostly a backend or a frontend problem ? > all of the above. Just get MPQC (google it) and then try to build it.
I'm doing it right now. It looks like a C++ application which means that your task of porting it to plan9 will be even more difficult than I previously though. It also looks like the sort of C++ they use is not strictly speaking ISO STD complaint. But I need more time to dig into this. > > Could you, please, elaborate on what exactly these apps > > need from gcc ? > > no. There's too long a list for email. But do you have this list ? > > I don't really think that with a difference in evironment > > between Linux and Plan9 the later holds true. > > have you looked at the apps? If by the apps you mean MPQC -- I'm looking at it right now. If by the apps you mean other OpenSource apps, there's a list of about 500+ of them I'm looking at on a weekly basis. Most of them have a pretty long list of non-trivial dependencies on Linux environment. > > 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 ? > gcc compatibility. Well, all I can say is -- its a pity that even more resources will be spent on proliferating gcc's bad influence on application developers. I understand that most likely you're doing it as part of your job which means that you don't really have a choice. Thanks, Roman. P.S. Is it that even HPC community is so commercialized and time-to-market oriented these days that there's no light at the end of the tunnel ? Looks like as far as Plan9 community is concerned, the only place where the decisions are not dictated by the mighty VOC is Nemo's research lab. Europe vs. USA kinda thing... I don't know...
