From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26965 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2004 01:09:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 26920 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2004 01:09:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out4.apple.com) (17.254.13.23) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 8 Dec 2004 01:09:50 -0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (a17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out4.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iB81HYZ5000587 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:17:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.apple.com (relay1.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.17) with ESMTP id ; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:10:57 -0800 Received: from [17.201.20.87] (mrs2.apple.com [17.201.20.87]) by relay1.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iB819lFP000414; Tue, 7 Dec 2004 17:09:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <41B65213.2050400@adacore.com> References: <41AF8607.6070800@laposte.net> <87oehcfivu.fsf@codesourcery.com> <1102345280.5107.57.camel@jfmorcillo.sdcgemenos.local> <41B4769E.3080602@codesourcery.com> <41B55331.1080506@adacore.com> <9846F6F9-3CC8-40BC-BA5A-2FA14B118587@apple.com> <41B65213.2050400@adacore.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v679) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <7087B493-DDF1-4773-A5D3-8BD36701EC20@apple.com> Cc: Nathan Sidwell , j_f@laposte.net, Zack Weinberg , list gcc Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Mike Stump Subject: Re: native gcc for vxworks Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 01:09:00 -0000 To: Robert Dewar X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00305.txt.bz2 On Dec 7, 2004, at 5:00 PM, Robert Dewar wrote: > Mike Stump wrote: > >> On Dec 6, 2004, at 10:52 PM, Robert Dewar wrote: >> >>> I trust the small here is meant with a sense of irony, since this >>> would >>> in practice be many person years of work I would guess. >>> >> No, it isn't that hard, probably take a few weeks. >> cygwin is a lot of work, not because of gcc, but because of the 1000s >> of other software packages it compiles. >> > > Well you are far more optimistic than I would be. After all even > getting > VxWorks to be posix compatible is a major amount of work. Gteting a > full > unix environment seems much harder to me. A hosted gcc doesn't require a full unix environment. The difference is the difference between making gcc and binutils work, versus making those work, plus /bin/sh and perl and awk and insert 400 other nice host programs here. I've seen gcc hosted on an MSDOS box treated as a target board.