From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Tue Jan 22 17:34:41 2008 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:44:30 -0500 (EST) From: Keith Scroggins To: mint Cc: MiKRO Subject: Re: [MiNT] Newest Native Binutils release.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <4774FCE7.7090002@freesbee.fr> <478D0570.8000404@freesbee.fr> <478D3F47.6060000@freesbee.fr> <478E080F.2030505@freesbee.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: kws@radix.net Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: Status: X-Status: X-Keywords: Hello Miro, I can not confirm yet. I am currently building Stage 3 of GCC (ran out of disk space overnight, I thought 650 megs was enough.) As far as your question about which version of GCC is installed. Stage 1 is to build the compiler used to build the compiler. Stage 2 and Stage 3 are suppose to be the compiler to be installed if they produce identical code, so you are building the compiler with itself when bootstrapping. You are suppose to keep going an additional stage until that test passes. As far as rebuilding GCC, I *think* you will need to bootstrap it again to make it a pure 68060 compiler. I have not looked into the code much lately, but if I remember right, the patches 'basically' made -m68060 = -m68020-60. When you rebuild, you would build the compiler the 'old' way (an 020-60 executable) which would be able to build 68060 instructions. I've have wondered about the need to keep in 68020 support. In my opinion, the multilib structure could be modified to be 68k, 68020-60, and 68060. Mshort support is debatable as well, but we probably should keep that to keep possible Pure C compatibility for building. Anyway, that is just my opinion. Does a stock Falcon or TT gain anything from a 68020 built binary or lib that is lost when making it compatible across all later Motorola generations? Sorry for the ramblings. Keith On Wed, 16 Jan 2008, MiKRO wrote: > Hmm, just compiled 2.18 and installed (it works with that > LIB_SEARCH_DIRS).... however -- I've tried to recompile mintlib (still > with old gcc2) and it doesn't look good -- mintlib is compiling, > compiling but as soon as the libc.a linking should occur, system > totally crashes (that means killing aranym, too) -- stack size > shouldn't be problem now, bash, ar, ranlib, nm etc are build with the > newest mintlib and have stack 1MB. > > can you Vincent or Keith confirm this? > > -- > MiKRO / Mystic Bytes > http://mikro.atari.org > >