On Sun, 2005-06-05 12:41:43 -0400, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * vax-*-bsd* > * vax-*-sysv* > If anyone is still using these, GCC probably doesn't run already. I > certainly haven't seen any test results. Correct me if I'm wrong! > And after some staring, I think these are bad models for new ports. vax-*-sysv* is probably dead. NetBSD using a.out most probably, too. Though, vax-netbsdelf may be fine up. At least, I can get vax-linux (or vax-elf) compiler (only adding some 5 lines for configury) that works and produces a correctly working Linux kernel image (see eg. http://www.pergamentum.com/pipermail/linux-vax/2005-May/000002.html). So VAXens shape isn't most probably all that bad right now. If you like, I'd submit the configury patch (by Kenn Humborg; copyright assignment should be in place right now) and at least submit a gcc test result for a i686-linux hosted vax-linux cross compiler. (But this doesn't look all that good because we haven't yet integrated userland support into gcc-HEAD nor an emulator to run tests on.) But after all, work is done on the VAX target (and two patches in my queue) in gcc as well as in binutils and there had been recent check-ins in both of these. As a side note: the uClibc folks do have a number of patches allowing gcc to configure against *-uclibc. How is the acceptance of these patches? MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] . +49-172-7608481 _ O _ "Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg _ _ O fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! | im Irak! O O O ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
