On 2012-05-18, at 4:39 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Vaugha Brewchuk <vaugha_brewc...@yahoo.ca> writes: > >> I also wonder whether perhaps a different gcc-4 version is a better >> starting point for the NeXT? > > Support for m68k-*-nextstep* has been removed 10 years ago.
Indeed, gcc-3.2.3 was the last version with m68k-*-nextstep configuration files but it would not build on NEXTSTEP or OPENSTEP because of NeXT header file idiosyncrasies choking the pre-processor. I have been working on reintegrating revised nextstep configuration files back into the gcc source and was able to build gcc-3.4.6 and now am trying gcc-4.6.3. I am hoping that a modern compiler will somewhat reinvigorate the interest in the platform... My other desire is to refresh the NeXT c library to a somewhat more modern configuration. For anyone interested, here is a good summary of my struggles: http://www.nextcomputers.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2980 This is really just a learning experience for me and I am very humbled by help from real software developers. > Andreas. > > -- > Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org > GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 > "And now for something completely different." > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/m2fwaxubm7....@igel.home > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/183bc33a-8f55-4dd6-98c7-ecca94313...@yahoo.ca
