508 lines
20 KiB
Plaintext
508 lines
20 KiB
Plaintext
From: Digestifier <Linux-Activists-Request@news-digests.mit.edu>
|
|
To: Linux-Activists@news-digests.mit.edu
|
|
Reply-To: Linux-Activists@news-digests.mit.edu
|
|
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 92 18:00:13 EST
|
|
Subject: Linux-Activists Digest #75
|
|
|
|
Linux-Activists Digest #75, Volume #1 Fri, 28 Feb 92 18:00:13 EST
|
|
|
|
Contents:
|
|
gcc 2.0 (Jiansheng Zhao)
|
|
Re: v86 mode is [not] useless (D.Bolla)
|
|
FAQ: the new gcc 1.40 (hlu%decserv2@dns1.eecs.wsu.edu)
|
|
Re: newgcc installation error (fwd) (hlu%decserv2@dns1.eecs.wsu.edu)
|
|
Re: Few comments about Linux (cm445a17)
|
|
Re: v86 mode is [not] useless (Wayne Davison)
|
|
Re: Easy video mode changes, nonstandard disk support, and v86 mode (Ian Wells)
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: Jiansheng Zhao <zhao@unixg.ubc.ca>
|
|
Subject: gcc 2.0
|
|
Reply-To: zhao@unixg.ubc.ca
|
|
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1992 17:14:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xref: unixg.ubc.ca ubc.unix:68 bc.unix:23 bc.general:292 ubc.general:198
|
|
Newsgroups: ubc.unix,bc.unix,bc.general,ubc.general
|
|
Path: unixg.ubc.ca!ubc-cs!acton
|
|
From: acton@cs.ubc.ca (Donald Acton)
|
|
Subject: gcc-2.0 available for anonymous ftp from cs.ubc.ca
|
|
Message-ID: <1992Feb23.211128.2847@cs.ubc.ca>
|
|
Sender: usenet@cs.ubc.ca (Usenet News)
|
|
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
|
|
Distribution: na
|
|
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 92 21:11:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
gcc-2.0 is available for anonymous ftp from cs.ubc.ca and can be found
|
|
in /pub/archive/gnu/gcc-2.0.tar.Z. Postscript versions of the gcc and
|
|
cpp manuals built from the texinfo files shipped with this release are
|
|
available as /pub/archive/gnu/manuals_ps/{gcc,cpp}-2.0.Z
|
|
|
|
Note that gcc seems to be the do everything C compiler as it supports
|
|
ANSI C, Objective C and C++ although it sounds like the Objective C
|
|
support might be incomplete. Poking around in the distribution I
|
|
noticed a makefile for MS-DOS.
|
|
|
|
Donald Acton
|
|
|
|
|
|
======The release announcement follows===============================
|
|
~From: rms@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Richard Stallman)
|
|
~Newsgroups: gnu.gcc.help,gnu.gcc.announce,gnu.g++.announce
|
|
~Subject: GCC 2.0 released
|
|
~Date: 22 Feb 92 08:54:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
People have been waiting for GCC 2.0 for a year. Now it's
|
|
available for anonymous ftp from /pub/gnu/gcc-2.0.tar.Z
|
|
on prep.ai.mit.edu. There are no diffs from version 1--such
|
|
diffs would be too large to be useful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Version 2 of GCC can generate code for the IBM PC/RT, the IBM RS/6000,
|
|
the Motorola 88000, the Acorn RISC machine (not fully tested), the AMD
|
|
29000 and the HP-PA (700 or 800), in addition to several machines
|
|
supported by version 1 (Motorola 68000, Vax, Sparc, National
|
|
Semiconductor 32000, Intel 386 and 860, and Mips). Ports for the IBM
|
|
370, the Intel 960, the Clipper, the Tron (a Japanese standard
|
|
computer architecture) and the NCUBE are on their way, but there is no
|
|
estimate of when they will be available. Note that using GCC to
|
|
compile for the HP-PA requires as yet unreleased versions of other GNU
|
|
software such as the assembler and linker.
|
|
|
|
Version 2 can generate output files in a.out, COFF, ECOFF, ELF, XCOFF,
|
|
VAX-VMS and OSF-Rose formats when used with a suitable assembler. It
|
|
can produce debugging information in several formats: BSD stabs, COFF,
|
|
ECOFF, ECOFF with stabs symbols, VAX-VMS and DWARF. (We may support
|
|
XCOFF for the RS/6000 in the future.)
|
|
|
|
Version 2 can be easily configured as a cross-compiler, running on one
|
|
platform while generating code for another.
|
|
|
|
Version 2 supports compatible calling conventions for function calling
|
|
and return values on the Sparc (unlike version 1) as well as the other
|
|
machine types.
|
|
|
|
Early testing of GCC Version 2.0 indicates that it produces faster
|
|
code for SPARC computers than Sun's latest released compilers (both
|
|
bundled and unbundled). It is also the fastest known compiler for
|
|
the Motorola 88k.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to ANSI C, GCC Version 2.0 includes support for the C++
|
|
and Objective C languages. Objective C is an object-oriented language
|
|
which adds to C features similar to Smalltalk. The front end for the
|
|
Objective C language was donated by NeXT Computers, Inc., which uses
|
|
GCC as the basis for their NeXTstep operating system. (Run-time
|
|
support for the Objective C language is still under development.)
|
|
|
|
GCC extends the C language to support nested functions, non-local
|
|
gotos, taking the address of program labels, and unnamed structures as
|
|
function arguments (among other things). There are also many new
|
|
warnings for frequent programming mistakes.
|
|
|
|
GCC Version 2 can produce position-independent code for several types
|
|
of CPU: 68000, 88000, 80386, Sparc, and RS/6000. Supporting PIC on
|
|
additional suitable CPU types is not too difficult a task.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: db1@ukc.ac.uk (D.Bolla)
|
|
Subject: Re: v86 mode is [not] useless
|
|
Date: 28 Feb 92 13:51:14 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: db1@ukc.ac.uk (D.Bolla)
|
|
|
|
In article <1992Feb27.165955.5796@borland.com> davison@borland.com (Wayne Davison) writes:
|
|
>D.Bolla (db1@ukc.ac.uk) wrote:
|
|
>> Let's face it. A V86 mode is almost useless.
|
|
>> What kind of programs (decent programs) do you see that use an 8086 ?
|
|
|
|
>You are seriously underestimating the useability of V86 mode. The DOS
|
|
>memory manager QEMM uses V86 mode to provide all sorts of loadhigh features
|
|
>and memory management services. This broke programs that tried to switch
|
|
>into protected mode and do their own memory management, but it was so
|
|
|
|
Yes the point is that linux is not stable as it is now ( and it is simple
|
|
now ). Loading a lot of stuff will make it so unstable to be useless.
|
|
|
|
Can I remind to you that:
|
|
A program that produce the WRONG result fast is useless...
|
|
|
|
For an OS there is no clear line between a good and bad result but the
|
|
same principle apply. If I use linux in a serious way I want it to be
|
|
stable !!!!
|
|
No point to have a lot of features that panic !
|
|
|
|
>popular that most programs were re-written to include VCPI support (which
|
|
>allows them to work with or without QEMM being present). These days you
|
|
>also have to support DPMI so you can run Windows 3.0 without resorting to
|
|
>real mode. Look at OS/2 2.0 -- they are providing an OS that uses V86
|
|
>dos boxes complete with DPMI (and I believe VCPI) support, so it CAN be
|
|
>done. Don't think that it's going to be easy, though.
|
|
|
|
Is it worth it ? Is it worth it to argue that it can be done ?
|
|
Of course it can be done !
|
|
|
|
BUT
|
|
|
|
The list of priorities has MANY more things in front of it.
|
|
Let's have first:
|
|
|
|
A STABLE KERNEL (The actual version still hang too often)
|
|
A FAST math emulation in the kernel.
|
|
A STABLE IPC
|
|
A STABLE TCP-IP
|
|
A STABLE X11
|
|
|
|
And then we may think about DOS and other things....
|
|
|
|
Damiano
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: hlu%decserv2@dns1.eecs.wsu.edu
|
|
Subject: FAQ: the new gcc 1.40
|
|
Reply-To: hlu%decserv2@dns1.eecs.wsu.edu
|
|
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1992 17:25:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
=============================================================
|
|
QUESTION: Where is the new gcc 1.40?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: It's on tsx-1.mit.edu under /pub/linux/binaries/compilers. It's
|
|
called newgcc.tar.Z
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: What is the content of newgcc.tar.Z?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: newgcc.tar.Z contains all the binaries, header files and
|
|
libraries needed to use gcc-1.40.
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: How do I install it?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: Just do
|
|
|
|
cd /usr
|
|
tar xvofvz xxxx/newgcc.tar.Z
|
|
|
|
Note: Some header files will be overwritten by the ones in
|
|
newgcc.tar.Z. If you rely on some changed header files. Then do
|
|
|
|
cd /usr/local
|
|
tar xvofvz xxxx/newgcc.tar.Z
|
|
|
|
I believe gcc will look for /usr/local first for anything. You may want
|
|
to either change your Makefiles or link gar/ar gas/as gld/ld to prevent
|
|
a lot off /stupid/ problems. But since gcc is the default compiler for
|
|
Linux, the prefix 'g' should be dropped.
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: What are the main differences with the old release?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: Those bugs related to estdio in the old port have been
|
|
corrected, like FP output and "compress *." And this package contains
|
|
387 support. There are
|
|
libm.a (for those with 387)
|
|
libsoft.a (for those without)
|
|
|
|
libtermcap.a (from tput 1.10) is separated from libc.a. The
|
|
-mstring-insns option is no longer needed nor supported.
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: I find FP to integer is not right. What is wrong?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: There is a bug in gnulib. That should have been fixed. Get a
|
|
new one from tsx-11.mit.edu. If it still doesn't work right, drop me a
|
|
note.
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: Is stdio ANSI compatible?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: No. Read the stdio.h in newgcc.tar.Z. It will be fixed in gcc
|
|
2.0. The stdio will be replaced by an ANSI compatible one based on BSD
|
|
4.4. You should read the stdio.h in newgcc.tar.Z to avoid the trouble
|
|
for now.
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: When will gcc 2.0 be released?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: Very soon.
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: Why does -O fail on some files?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: The -O option may fail when the INLINE functions (string.h) are
|
|
passed as parameters. There is nothing wrong with compiler(?). They
|
|
will be fixed in gcc 2.0. You can change the source to avoid that.
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: Where is the source code of the new libc.a?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: Drop me a note. The only difference is stdio. Since it will be
|
|
replaced in gcc 2.0, I suggest you wait for 2.0.
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: Why cannot gcc exec cpp and cc1?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: Someone suggests me to put cc1 and cpp in /usr/local/lib. I
|
|
changed the driver. But I forgot to move cc1 and cpp. It will be solved
|
|
in gcc 2.0. For now, just do
|
|
ln -s /usr/lib/cpp /usr/local/lib
|
|
ln -s /usr/lib/cc1 /usr/local/lib
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: Where is limits.h?
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: You may need to get the lastest header files, aka the ones from
|
|
the kernel sources.
|
|
=============================================================
|
|
|
|
H.J.
|
|
--
|
|
School of EECS Internet: hlu@eecs.wsu.edu
|
|
Washington State University BITNET: 60935893@WSUVM1.BITNET
|
|
Pullman, WA 99164 Phone: (509) 335-6470 (O)
|
|
USA (509) 334-6315 (H)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: hlu%decserv2@dns1.eecs.wsu.edu
|
|
Subject: Re: newgcc installation error (fwd)
|
|
Reply-To: hlu%decserv2@dns1.eecs.wsu.edu
|
|
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1992 17:25:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Forwarded message:
|
|
| From @nic.funet.fi:daemon@joker.cs.hut.fi Fri Feb 28 09:12 PST 1992
|
|
| X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
|
|
| Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1992 19:02:09 +0200
|
|
| From: tim <csn0140%ux.acs.umn.edu@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
|
|
| Subject: Re: newgcc installation error
|
|
| Sender: linux-activists-request@niksula.cs.hut.fi
|
|
| To: linux-activists@niksula.cs.hut.fi
|
|
| Cc: linux-activists@joker.cs.hut.fi
|
|
| Message-Id: <199202281702.AA01321@ux.acs.umn.edu>
|
|
| In-Reply-To: <9202281601.AA09613@numero6.greco-prog.fr>; from "Marc CORSINI" at
|
|
| Feb 28, 92 5:01 pm
|
|
| X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
|
|
| X-Envelope-To: linux-activists@niksula.hut.fi
|
|
|
|
|
| >
|
|
| >
|
|
| >
|
|
| > May be the cc1 and cpp could be link in /usr/bin (I think this is the
|
|
| > only thing I've done which was not in the readme)
|
|
|
|
NO. NO. Someone suggests me to put cc1 and cpp in /usr/local/lib. I
|
|
changed the driver. But I forgot to move cc1 and cpp. It will be solved
|
|
in gcc 2.0.
|
|
|
|
| >
|
|
| yes! I made sym-links from /usr/lib/cc1 and /usr/lib/cpp to
|
|
| /usr/bin/cc1 and /usr/bin/cpp and the problem was solved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| there doesn't seem to be an limits.h in /usr/include...i commented the
|
|
| line #include <limits.h> out of stdio.h and was able to compile some
|
|
| stuff successfully. i'll worry about getting a limits.h later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You may need to get the lastest header files, aka the ones from the
|
|
kernel sources.
|
|
|
|
H.J.
|
|
--
|
|
School of EECS Internet: hlu@eecs.wsu.edu
|
|
Washington State University BITNET: 60935893@WSUVM1.BITNET
|
|
Pullman, WA 99164 Phone: (509) 335-6470 (O)
|
|
USA (509) 334-6315 (H)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: cm445a17@socrates.umd.edu (cm445a17)
|
|
Subject: Re: Few comments about Linux
|
|
Date: 28 Feb 92 21:11:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
mikeb@yarra.pyramid.com.au (Michael Bethune) writes:
|
|
|
|
>In article <1992Feb28.051847.19790@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark William Hopkins) writes:
|
|
>>In article <1992Feb18.100319.21517@micromuse.co.uk> dj@micromuse.co.uk (D.J.Walker-Morgan) writes:
|
|
>>>
|
|
>>>|> A 486-33 outperforms a low end SPARC, and my 386-33 is easily twice
|
|
>>>|> as fast as my HP Bobcats.
|
|
>>>
|
|
>>In computer science, you learn that if you want speed, you write better
|
|
>>algorithms and use parallelism instead of beating a faster processor against a
|
|
>>brick wall.
|
|
|
|
>Thank you for reminding me about what my degree taught me. 8-)
|
|
|
|
>[nonsense deleted]
|
|
|
|
>>In any case, it's not speed that counts, it's functionality. The bottom line
|
|
>>is: what microprocessor has the best low-level hardware support for operating
|
|
>>systems?
|
|
>>
|
|
>>I won't answer the question, because I don't know what a SPARC supports
|
|
>>(semaphores, memory segments/protection, access levels, caching, or whatever).
|
|
>>I do know that the 386 and above have ideal OS support, though it tends to
|
|
>>suffer from having a long heritage dating back to the 8080 (when people were
|
|
>>still living in caves).
|
|
|
|
>Just what do mean by 'the bottom line is: what micoprocessor has the best
|
|
>low-level hardware support for operating systems'?
|
|
|
|
>This 'bottom line' makes no sense. What operating systems? This is crucial
|
|
>to understanding what kind of support is useful. There is a whole lot of
|
|
>difference between what good in supporting a small address space operating
|
|
>system like MS-DOS without virtual memory and what is useful to support
|
|
>say UNIX.
|
|
|
|
>Afterall an 8088 provides all the 'low-level support' MS-DOS needs.
|
|
|
|
>The point being there are various operating systems that make various demands
|
|
>upon a CPU. More to the point, Operating systems like any program make
|
|
>demands upon a whole range of sub-systems, CPU, memory, bus traffic, I/O
|
|
>sub-systems etc etc. Looking at CPU speed/capabilities in isolation is
|
|
>a favourite past time of the MIP merchants and marketoids, it says very
|
|
>little about ultimate machine performance for a given application.
|
|
|
|
>This is very relevant to 486s versus Sparc.
|
|
|
|
>To make the point more strongly, what is useful about a
|
|
>12 SPEC mark CPU, if its sitting idle in wait states waiting for
|
|
>slow memory sub-systems, or slow I/O sub-systems.
|
|
|
|
>A high performance desktop machine requires balance between its different
|
|
>components.
|
|
|
|
>In general Intel based PCs tend to be built for a low price point where
|
|
>performance versus price trade offs are inevitably made.
|
|
|
|
>Consider the ISA bus, it has a through put of not much more than 5 Megabytes
|
|
>per second. Even the EISA bus is crippled by poor bandwidth to retain
|
|
>compatability with the ISA bus.
|
|
|
|
>Sun Sparc workstations in contrast tend to balance a capable processor
|
|
>with good bus performance, good memory sub-systems, mass-storage
|
|
>peripherals and some of the best ethernet performance in the business.
|
|
|
|
>On the other hand Intel based PC's provide peerless single user performance,
|
|
>with non-virtual memory operating systems like MS-DOS.
|
|
|
|
>--
|
|
>Michael Bethune Disclaimer: I have no commercial
|
|
>Independent Unix Consultant. relationship with Pyramid and
|
|
>Phone: +61 3 018 538103 do not represent them in any way.
|
|
>Melbourne, Australia.
|
|
|
|
Please, this is a news group about Linux. It is NOT a platforms nor
|
|
an operating systems discussion group. Take your topics to were they
|
|
belong (i.e. another newsgroup). Thank you!
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: davison@borland.com (Wayne Davison)
|
|
Subject: Re: v86 mode is [not] useless
|
|
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1992 21:51:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
D.Bolla (db1@ukc.ac.uk) wrote:
|
|
> Let's face it. A V86 mode is almost useless.
|
|
|
|
I said:
|
|
> You are seriously underestimating the useability of V86 mode.
|
|
|
|
D.Bolla responds:
|
|
> Yes the point is that linux is not stable as it is now ( and it is simple
|
|
> now ). Loading a lot of stuff will make it so unstable to be useless.
|
|
|
|
If you notice I said nothing about when or if a V86 mode should be done. Only
|
|
that an 8086 mode running under a [34]86 OS is much more powerful than simply
|
|
an 8086 chip. _My_ point was to correct an inaccuracy, and I left the other
|
|
points of your article untouched. But as long as I'm here, let me address
|
|
_your_ point.
|
|
|
|
I agree that the stability of Linux should be the highest goal, along with
|
|
providing a large enough set of the basic kernel services to make it useful
|
|
(things like the IPC and VFS efforts). However, I disagree that people
|
|
talking about and maybe even beginning to develop other new-fangled features
|
|
is detrimental to the product. Keep in mind that the public community of
|
|
Linux hackers is quite large and diverse. There are already people focusing
|
|
on riding the kernel of bugs and providing the enhancements necessary to
|
|
run things like X windows. If this effort is under-staffed, then by all
|
|
means let this be known so that someone else can help out.
|
|
|
|
Just don't think that throwing more people at a task will necessarily speed
|
|
it up. The rule is to choose a few good people (or just one) to target a
|
|
specific area that needs improvement and allow that group (person) to focus
|
|
on it. Having someone working on an improved memory manager that would
|
|
support a V86 mode is a great idea. When and if it gets included into the
|
|
mainstream distribution is then an integration decision that can happen after
|
|
it's done. I argue that having these side-line development efforts is not
|
|
detracting from the central goal of a version 1.0 Linux in any way as long
|
|
as we have a core group of people who are already working on the basics.
|
|
|
|
Remember that Linus has a very good track record of not throwing in just any
|
|
new feature that comes along. And if Linus passes the baton on to another
|
|
to succeed him in this job, he or she will have to be equally conservative
|
|
in only adding the things to the mainstream distribution that are well thought
|
|
out and well implemented.
|
|
--
|
|
\ /| / /|\/ /| /(_) Wayne Davison
|
|
(_)/ |/ /\|/ / |/ \ davison@borland.com
|
|
(W A Y N e)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ijw11@phx.cam.ac.uk (Ian Wells)
|
|
Subject: Re: Easy video mode changes, nonstandard disk support, and v86 mode
|
|
Date: 28 Feb 92 15:59:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1992Feb27.114932.15983@wam.umd.edu> joel@wam.umd.edu (Joel M. Hoffman) writes:
|
|
|
|
[ ... comments about nice DOS programs ... ]
|
|
|
|
WordPerfect and Quicken come immediately to mind. While I don't
|
|
actually use WP and more, I know many people that do, and I'd like to be
|
|
able to use Linux without giving up such nice DOS programs. Most
|
|
programs still run under a simple 8086. I also have several games for
|
|
DOS that I simply cannot port to Linux. (Scrabble, Chess, etc.)
|
|
|
|
Yes, so use DOS for them. It would make Linux unnecessariy complicated to
|
|
add DOS. It's developing as a nice operating system in its own right, forcing
|
|
support for another OS onto it is taking a step backward. If you want a good
|
|
WP, game, etc. write your own for Linux or keep DOS on your disk.
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
>Do you want DOS to hang in the middle of you wordprocessor ?
|
|
>I don't
|
|
>
|
|
|
|
If the DOS emulator dies it's not nearly to critical as if the OS
|
|
dies. Under Linux, everything else will keep running. Not SO bad....
|
|
|
|
-Joel
|
|
|
|
One point about this is that if DOS trickery has to be coded into the MM then
|
|
it's a lot more likely to hang Linux at the same time. It's also a lot more
|
|
likely that Linux will hang given the amount of bugs adding such code would
|
|
produce.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
|
|
|
|
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
|
|
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Activists-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
You can send mail to the entire list (and alt.os.linux) via:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Activists@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
|
|
nic.funet.fi pub/OS/Linux
|
|
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
|
|
tupac-amaru.informatik.rwth-aachen.de pub/msdos/replace
|
|
|
|
The current version of Linux is 0.12, released on Jan 14, 1992
|
|
|
|
End of Linux-Activists Digest
|
|
******************************
|