18 Jan
2002
18 Jan
'02
12:53 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 08:36:05AM +0100, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
Hello,
Is anyone using GCC to compile code for the PDP-11?
on the PDP or cross-compiled? (will gcc run under 2.11?)
--
Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | agrier(a)poofygoof.com
"Making people dance so hard their pants almost fall
off is kind of fun." -- David Evans
18 Jan
18 Jan
1:07 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:53:20PM -0800, Aaron J. Grier wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 08:36:05AM +0100, Lars
Brinkhoff wrote:
On the PDP: very unlikely. gcc is far too big to fit in even split
ID I would assume?!
--
| / o / /_ _ email: wilko(a)FreeBSD.org
|/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands
Hello,
Is anyone using GCC to compile code for the PDP-11?
on the PDP or cross-compiled? (will gcc run under 2.11?) 
3:06 p.m.
Wilko Bulte <wkb(a)freebie.xs4all.nl> writes:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:53:20PM -0800, Aaron J.
Grier wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 08:36:05AM +0100, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> > Is anyone using GCC to compile code for the PDP-11?
> on the PDP or cross-compiled? (will gcc run under 2.11?)
Cross compilation, I assume. Doesn't matter to me, I just want to
know if anyone's using it.
On the PDP: very unlikely. gcc is far too big to fit
in even split
ID I would assume?!
Yes. Dunno if it could be made to work with overlays or something,
but it'd be very slow.
--
Lars Brinkhoff http://lars.nocrew.org/ Linux, GCC, PDP-10
Brinkhoff Consulting http://www.brinkhoff.se/ programming
8:49 p.m.
Not only is size a problem, but even as a cross-compiler it is lacking.
I am pretty sure support for the PDP stopped many releases ago and even
at the peak of support I don't believe there was ever as or ld support
for the PDP. I have considered reviving the PDP cross compiling work
and looking at writting a translator to take the output from -S (which
I am quite certain would be AT&T format) and convert it to Macro-11.
I usually end out weighing this against the work necessary to just write
a C-compiler for the PDP (using Small C as a starting point). If only
I could retire so I'ld have the free time. :-)
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bill(a)cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
9:31 p.m.
Bill Gunshannon <bill(a)cs.scranton.edu> writes:
I don't believe there was ever as or ld support
for the PDP.
I added PDP-11 support to GNU binutils last year. It's not well
tested, though.
--
Lars Brinkhoff http://lars.nocrew.org/ Linux, GCC, PDP-10
Brinkhoff Consulting http://www.brinkhoff.se/ programming
19 Jan
19 Jan
1 a.m.
On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
Not only is size a problem, but even as a
cross-compiler it is lacking.
I am pretty sure support for the PDP stopped many releases ago and even
at the peak of support I don't believe there was ever as or ld support
for the PDP. I have considered reviving the PDP cross compiling work
and looking at writting a translator to take the output from -S (which
I am quite certain would be AT&T format) and convert it to Macro-11.
I usually end out weighing this against the work necessary to just write
a C-compiler for the PDP (using Small C as a starting point). If only
I could retire so I'ld have the free time. :-)
Two things.
1. DECUS C might be a better starting point.
2. With DECUS C, you also have an as, which might fit the bill without
having to convert stuff to Macro-11.
Johnny
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt(a)update.uu.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
3:54 a.m.
Consider lcc, the Princeton C compiler. It's much smaller than gcc, and ANSI
compliant.
--
Jonathan Engdahl Rockwell Automation
Principal Research Engineer 1 Allen-Bradley Drive
Advanced Technology Mayfield Heights, OH 44124 USA
Mayfield Heights Labs engdahl(a)safeaccess.com 440-646-7326
2:48 p.m.
Johnny Billquist <bqt(a)update.uu.se> writes:
DECUS C might be a better starting point.
norman(a)nose.cs.utoronto.ca writes:
I would probably use lcc as a cross-compiler myself,
after writing
or snitching a code generator of course.
bwc(a)borf.com writes:
I got Dennis' sixth edtion compiler to compile
not long ago.
My advice would be to start there.
How about the 2.11BSD compiler?
--
Lars Brinkhoff http://lars.nocrew.org/ Linux, GCC, PDP-10
Brinkhoff Consulting http://www.brinkhoff.se/ programming
20 Jan
20 Jan
3:19 a.m.
In article by Lars Brinkhoff:
norman(a)nose.cs.utoronto.ca writes:
The next question is, why to do this, and for which operating system(s)?
If it's to get an ANSI C compiler, or some extra performance, then I
can see the point. If it's to ditch a `contaminated' compiler, then
I can see a few difficulties, especially if the target is 2.11BSD
The 2.11BSD linker knows an awful lot about overlays, and any replacement
would need to do the same.
Anway, that's my $0.02. I thought about porting lcc to 2.11BSD ages ago,
but I've never had the time to do it.
Cheers,
Warren
I would probably use lcc as a cross-compiler
myself, after writing
or snitching a code generator of course.
bwc(a)borf.com writes:
I got Dennis' sixth edtion compiler to
compile not long ago.
My advice would be to start there.
How about the 2.11BSD compiler?
19 Jan
19 Jan
12:06 a.m.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 10:44:17PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
In article by Aaron J. Grier:
Not until you can get a 32-bit process address space and virtual paging
on the PDP-11 :-)
isn't that what VAX is all about? ;)
--
Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | agrier(a)poofygoof.com
"Making people dance so hard their pants almost fall
off is kind of fun." -- David Evans
Is anyone
using GCC to compile code for the PDP-11?
on the PDP or cross-compiled? (will gcc
run under 2.11?)
8372
days inactive
8373
days old
10 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Aaron J. Grier -
Bill Gunshannon -
Johnny Billquist -
Jonathan Engdahl -
Lars Brinkhoff -
Warren Toomey -
Wilko Bulte