> From: "David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jens Rehsack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 10:01 AM > Subject: Re: PATCH: type errors in src-tree >
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 12:08:04AM +0100, Jens Rehsack wrote: > > Now, that OpenWatcom is released, the FreeBSd port of it should follow. > > And maybe someone will try to compile the kernel and world with it. > > I hate to be the skeptic, but looking at OpenWatcom 1.0, it only produces > dos and win32 binaries. It will be a *long* time until it targets Unix > correctly. Just FYI: Well, not only dos and win32, but it will be really long... What they have now: > From: "Bart Oldeman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Newsgroups: openwatcom.contributors > Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 7:36 AM > Subject: Re: bootstrap on linux > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Michal Necasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> Andi Kleen wrote: > >>> does a native bootstrap on linux of openwatcom work yet? > >>> > >> No. Some of the tools can be built and some even work but not > >> enough to get the build environment going. > > > > Can you elaborate a bit on it. What does work, what doesn't? > > the compilers work (wcc386 and wcc), compiled using gcc and compiled > using watcom. they can however (still) only reliably output OMF > objects. > > wlink can be cross-compiled for Linux but crashes (SIGSEGV) if you > run it there to combine several OMFs into an ELF executable. Without > a working linker the Linux hosted compiler isn't very useful yet > -- and a full bootstrap impossible. > > There has been an attempt to cross-compile wasm, I'm not sure how > far that went. > > wmake cannot be compiled yet -- it uses spawnxx calls that would > need to be translated into fork()s and execve()s for Linux (using > a wrapper or to be implemented in the Watcom LIBC). > > And Linux development has stalled for the last month (lack of time of > the contributors). > > Bart heh > > > If that would work, this would be great, because the watcom compiler > > generates much better code than gcc does, even than gcc -O3 (and all > > known optimizations on). > > Rather than just repeat some old wife's tale; can anyone produce a real > analysis backing this statement up? Not me :) Igor To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
