29 Oct
2000
29 Oct
'00
2:47 p.m.
In message <Pine.LNX.4.10.10010282233320.29172-100000(a)smarty.smart.net>et>, "R.
D.
Davis" writes:
On 28 Oct 2000, Eric Smith wrote:
Yes and no. The gcc port that was packaged up in a nice
distribution did require some parts of the development
set IIRC. However, before I had access to such archives,
I ended up doing a port of gcc the hard way. To give you
an idea what I mean by the hard way, I started the process
by writing a 68000 disassembler in awk since that was the
only language (other than the shell) that comes with the
foundation set. In the process I was able to deduce how
the shared library worked and made reasonable guesses for
the header files. Later I found in the archives of
comp.sources.3b1 a set of header files that fixed some
of the weakness in mine. (Of course, if you want to
be technical, those header files are modified versions of
the ones in the development set.) Unfortunately, I don't think
I ever put it in the index of the archive that I sent Peter
for unixpc.taronga.com. (It's probably burried on the CD
somewhere though.)
It's great seeing semi-active discussion of the 7300/3b1.
It's still one of my favorite machines.
Brian L. Stuart
The C compiler is K&R (non-ANSI), but there
is a port of GCC.
Note that to use the port of GCC, one still needs to have the
development set.