public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* gcc Question
@ 2000-06-19  8:44 LINTNER, MITCHELL (SBCSI)
  2000-06-19  9:57 ` Tim Prince
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: LINTNER, MITCHELL (SBCSI) @ 2000-06-19  8:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'

I apologize for this question. My goal is to compile Perl on an HP running
version 10.20. I have downloaded what I thought was binaries for gcc. I was
assuming that this would be just a load and go operation. Now that I have it
downloaded and unzipped/untarred, I'm lost. What is my next step. I have
never done this before. I have always worked where I had good unix support
who did this for me.

Thanks,

Mitch

Mitch Lintner

SBC Services, Inc. supporting SBC Wireless
2180 N Glenville Dr.
Richardson, Texas, 75082
Phone: 972-470-8107
Email: mitchell.lintner@sbc.com


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <OFE65E91CB.007DAF79-ON8525701B.0062A53C-8525701B.00635711@us.ibm.com>]
* Re: gcc question
@ 2003-05-24 13:55 John Anthony Kazos Jr.
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: John Anthony Kazos Jr. @ 2003-05-24 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc

 > Each time I compile and link my library source code, the compiler add
 > the prefix lib to the compiled file name.
 >
 > Which is the option that I need to pass to gcc to tell the
 > compiler/linker not to add the prefix lib at the beginning of the linked
 > file ?

I'm interested in the answer to this question, as well. I'd also like to 
know if there's a way to adjust existing programs. For example, running 
ldd() on an executable shows me a reference to "/lib/ld-linux.so.2", and 
I'd like that to be a reference simply to "ld-linux" so it will 
automatically find the ld-linux.so file.

If I'm misunderstanding how it works, and it really does need a full path 
(which is stupid, but oh well), then I'd like to be able to change it to a 
reference to "/some/where/ld-linux.so".

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* gcc question
@ 2003-05-23 20:12 Michel Cunha
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Michel Cunha @ 2003-05-23 20:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc

Each time I compile and link my library source code, the compiler add
the prefix lib to the compiled file name.

Which is the option that I need to pass to gcc to tell the
compiler/linker not to add the prefix lib at the beginning of the linked
file ?
-- 


Regards,

Michel Cunha
Software Developer
Callisto Media Systems, Inc
490 St. Joseph Boulevard, Suite 402
Hull (Quebec)
J8Y 3Y7
Canada
Tel: +1-819-770-5738, ext 107
Fax: +1-819-770-3998
Email: MCunha@Callisto.ca
Web: www.callisto.ca

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* gcc question
@ 2003-03-27 19:07 Rick Albright
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Rick Albright @ 2003-03-27 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc

Hello,

I'm trying to compile a program using gcc, and I get the following message:

gcc:installation problem, cannot exec `cpp': No such file or directory

cpp is loaded (/usr/ccs/lib). I'm using a Sun workstation SunOS 5.7. Can you
provide me some information on figuring out what I need to do to get this
working.

Thank you,

Rick Albright
****************************************
Rick Albright
NEC Solutions (America), Inc.
Phone: (215) 627-7510
Fax: (215) 627-7515
Cell: (717) 471-2731
Email: RickAlbright@msn.com
          rick.albright@necsam.com
****************************************

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: gcc question
@ 2002-01-06  8:25 dewar
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: dewar @ 2002-01-06  8:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc, thesbman

<<Do you know where I can find a version of gcc that runs on an x86 machine
but can compile a program for a powerpc machine?
steven blakeslee
>>

I know of at least 8 ports of gcc for the x86, and at least 3 for the power pc,
and I am sure there are more I don't know of. Which of the 24 crosses are
you talking about?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* gcc question
@ 2002-01-06  7:06 steven blakeslee
  2002-01-06  8:27 ` Jeff Sturm
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: steven blakeslee @ 2002-01-06  7:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc

Do you know where I can find a version of gcc that runs on an x86 machine 
but can compile a program for a powerpc machine?
steven blakeslee



_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* GCC question.
@ 2001-08-24  8:35 Stephen Jones
  2001-08-24 17:16 ` Joern Rennecke
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Jones @ 2001-08-24  8:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephen.Jones, gcc, stephen.clarke

I have a question to ask about an example of the combination phase on some RTL.
The target has 64-bit integer registers and I wish to perform zero extension
from HI to DI using an "and" operation with a bit-mask of 0xffff. However, the
current method of zero extension seems to benefit from an extra combination
under certain circumstances which the masking version seems to miss.

Given the following RTL (paraphrasing for brevity):
	:	:	:	:	:
(set (reg:SI 168) (subreg:SI (reg/v:DI 160) 0)) (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/v:DI
160)

(set (reg:SI 167) (plus:SI (reg:SI 168) (const_int 1 [0x1]))
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 168)(expr_list:REG_EQUAL (plus:SI (subreg:SI
(reg/v:DI 160) 0) (const_int 1 [0x1])

(set (reg/v:DI 160) (zero_extend:DI (subreg:HI (reg:SI 167) 0)))
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 167)
	:	:	:	:	:

The combiner spots that it can perform the "plus" directly in DI mode because
the top 32 (actually 48) bits are going to be thrown away, then remove the
first subreg set, which saves a move instruction as it turns out.
However, given *functionally* equivalent RTL:

	:	:	:	:	:
(set (reg:SI 168) (subreg:SI (reg/v:DI 160) 0)) (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/v:DI
160)

(set (reg:SI 167) (plus:SI (reg:SI 168) (const_int 1 [0x1]))
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 168)(expr_list:REG_EQUAL (plus:SI (subreg:SI
(reg/v:DI 160) 0) (const_int 1 [0x1])

(set (reg/v:DI 160) (and:DI (subreg:HI (reg:SI 167) 0) (reg:DI 170))
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg_SI 167) (expr_list:REG_EQUAL (zero_extend:DI
(subreg:HI (reg:SI 167) 0)
	:	:	:	:	:

The combiner doesn't spot the optimisation. The reg:DI 170 contains the 0xffff,
which the compiler should know as it just put it there! Also, the REG_EQUAL
note shows that the discarding of the top 48 bits could also be considered.

So my question is:
i)  What is stopping the combination in the second case?
ii) Is there in fact some standard way of doing this masking operation which
would not incur this problem?

Many thanks,
	- Steve.

-- 
  			   - Stephen Jones -
	  ST Microelectronics, Almondsbury, Bristol, United Kingdom.
		   .(2430 Aztec Park West -- Software Dept).
			Tel/VM (+44)(1454) 462388.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* GCC Question
@ 2001-04-12 13:01 gdunlap
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: gdunlap @ 2001-04-12 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc

Hi,
    I was unable to find on your web page weather or not GCC produces
the Abstract Syntax Tree of the code and if there is a way to have the
AST sent to the screen if you give the appropriate command line option.

Thanks,
Greg Dunlap
gdunlap@memphis.edu

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <200002032057.MAA15624@yamato.synopsys.com>]
* gcc question
@ 2000-02-01 23:25 Sang-Kil Lee
  2000-02-01 23:45 ` Alexandre Oliva
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sang-Kil Lee @ 2000-02-01 23:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc

Hello,

I have a question.

I wrote a simple C program and then compiled it using gcc with an option

'-g' got a binary code.
I ran it and it finished successfully but didn't invoke a debugger(ex.
gdb).
Of course, I know that I can invoke the binary code using gdb(ex.
unix_prompt> gdb <binary_code>).
But what I want is that the debugger is invoked as soon as I run the
binary code.
Is it possible to attach the debugger to the binary code? If so, Please
let me know a method.

Regards,
Sang-Kil



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2005-06-10 13:34 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-06-19  8:44 gcc Question LINTNER, MITCHELL (SBCSI)
2000-06-19  9:57 ` Tim Prince
     [not found] <OFE65E91CB.007DAF79-ON8525701B.0062A53C-8525701B.00635711@us.ibm.com>
2005-06-10 13:34 ` GCC question Robert Bernecky
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-05-24 13:55 gcc question John Anthony Kazos Jr.
2003-05-23 20:12 Michel Cunha
2003-03-27 19:07 Rick Albright
2002-01-06  8:25 dewar
2002-01-06  7:06 steven blakeslee
2002-01-06  8:27 ` Jeff Sturm
2001-08-24  8:35 GCC question Stephen Jones
2001-08-24 17:16 ` Joern Rennecke
2001-04-12 13:01 GCC Question gdunlap
     [not found] <200002032057.MAA15624@yamato.synopsys.com>
2000-02-03 16:13 ` gcc question Joe Buck
2000-02-06 19:26 ` Alexandre Oliva
2000-02-01 23:25 Sang-Kil Lee
2000-02-01 23:45 ` Alexandre Oliva
2000-02-02 12:31   ` Martin v. Loewis
2000-02-02 12:52     ` Alexandre Oliva

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).