On Wed, 16 Jul 2014, William D. Jones wrote:

> I'm afraid that I am cross-compiling from a Linux system, and as to not
> contaminate my source tree, I wanted  to create a "tools" version of PCC that
> can be used to compile the rest of the tree. However, if your source tree does
> not have __USE (Google says you are a PCC developer), then it's probable that
> NetBSDs version of PCC is simply out of date.

it certainly is. I think I remember that __USE() now, it was a local
(NetBSD) addition due to a set but unused variable, which is changed in
upstream versions now

> I have a separate compiler (GCC) on my host machine as well... I can skip
> HAVE_PCC for now and just have the distribution ship PCC, or I can try an
> EXTERNAL_TOOLCHAIN. The latter is not trivial, since I have to create a
> cross-PCC. But I want to see JUST how much software PCC is capable of
> compiling. For example, will it compile most untarred source trees and GNU
> autoconfed trees I throw at it on the 486 without problem? The NetBSD source
> tree is a good test for this.

It does handle most of the NetBSD source tree lately, the main problems
currently are things which GCC accepts (or encourages) which are not
supported. Personally, I think it would be good for PCC to be able to
build GCC, perhaps that would be enough compatibility.

I have not tried application sources (eg pkgsrc) due to lack of time.

> As an aside, is it possible for PCC to reliably build the first stage of
> GCC <= 4.7.3?

I am not sure, but it may not.. predictably the GCC developers use GCC
language features within their code, and these are not always supported. I
have been concentrating on other things lately and have not tried to build
GCC with PCC. At least I know that the binutils we have in tree won't
build, as there is an unsupported feature which causes an error (restrict
keyword in array declaration)

regards,
iain

Reply via email to