On 2006-12-28 20:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >> Does the lang/gcc41 port work for you? > > I don't know I don't care.
Ok, then. > I want to learn more about compilation processes, get to know > UNIX-like systems more, and whatever. That's ok too. You are bound for a very fun ride, even if it takes years to realize that it never ends, though :) > So I've downloaded the source for gcc, and the README says that I need > the ISO C90 compiler. There is no "ISO C90 compiler". There is an ANSI/ISO standard for the "C Programming Language", which is _implemented_ by some compilers. You already have an installation of the GNU C compiler (GCC), installed as the system compiler of your FreeBSD system. This installation of GCC includes support for some of the standards related to the C Programming Language. You can find out more about the standards supported by your installation of GCC, by running: % info gcc In the "info browser" that pops up, follow the "Standards:" link and you can read a lot of details about the various language standards supported by your GCC installation. > Where do I get that? You have it already. See the "info" documentation of GCC. In short, you can get GCC to run in a special mode, which is almost conforming to the ISO9899:1990 standard for the C language. This mode is enabled by the options: % gcc -ansi -pedantic ... or by the equivalent set of options: % gcc -std=c89 -pedantic ... In this mode, GCC will produce diagnostic messages for all non-ISO programs, with only one notable exception, documented in its manual (see the section `Options Controlling C Dialect'): The alternate keywords `__asm__', `__extension__', `__inline__' and `__typeof__' continue to work despite `-ansi'. You would not want to use them in an ISO C program, of course, but it is useful to put them in header files that might be included in compilations done with `-ansi'. Alternate predefined macros such as `__unix__' and `__vax__' are also available, with or without `-ansi'. This minor exception means that GCC, even with the options mentioned above is *NOT* 100%-conforming to the C90 standard, but it is so close to a fully-conforming implementation of a C90 compiler, that you will hardly ever notice, unless you use one of the extensions listed above. > OK it looks like I can compile gcc 4.1 with an older gcc, but that's > not my choice. I don't know why you feel that this is not a good choice, but if you go through the info documentation of GCC and *still* feel this way, then I'd be interested to know why :) > [ But if that's the case, how was the first gcc compiled? xD ] > [ How was the first ever compiler compiled? xD ] This process is called "compiler bootstrapping". Google for it, and you will be amazed at how it works :-) Regards, Giorgos _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"