Hi Richard, Could you please provide some more instructions on how you got your 2.95 build using GCC 3?
I just tried using GCC 3.4.6 (from http://packages.ubuntu.com/hardy/amd64/gcc-3.4-base/download) and build from source using this command: CC=../gcc-3.4/bin/gcc-3.4 CFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=0 ./configure --prefix=~/gcc-2.95.3 --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-threads=posix --enable-shared --host i386-pc-linux-gnu It dies right away because it can't find cc1. I got the cc1 executable from the corresponding cpp 3.4.6 package (http://packages.ubuntu.com/hardy/amd64/cpp-3.4/download) and placed it in the same bin directory as the gcc-3.4 executable, but still nothing. As you can probably guess I've never build GCC from source before.. but I can right away spot that the target host is i386 - I'm assuming that's due to the fact that GCC 2.95 doesn't even support x86_64? Regards, Roman. On 03-Apr-2012, at 6:30 , Richard Guenther wrote: > On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 04/02/2012 06:29 PM, Roman Suvorov wrote: >>> Hello everyone, >>> Not sure if this is the right place to ask this question, feel free to >>> point me in the right direction. >> >> Redirect to gcc-help. >> >>> I'm looking into the evolution of Linux kernel and this requires me >>> to build some ancient releases (as old as 2.4.0) from source using >>> GCC. I have gcc 4.4.3-4ubuntu5 installed on my lab machine but it's >>> incompatible with these old sources, and the "lowest common >>> denominator" would be gcc 2.95.3, so I've been trying to compile it >>> from source - so far with little success. >> >>> It's hard but not impossible - done before by this guy: >>> http://www.trevorpounds.com/blog/?p=111&cpage=1#comment-102. I >>> followed all of his suggestions but so far hasn't had much luck - >>> most recent attempt dies with the following message: >> >>> /usr/bin/ld.bfd.real: error in pic/cstrmain.o(.eh_frame); no .eh_frame_hdr >>> table will be created. >>> >>> The URL above contains a link to my stdout/stderr logs too. Has anyone here >>> tried compiling such an old version of GCC? Any advice/help would be >>> greatly appreciated. >> >> It's going to be hard. gcc 2.95 doesn't support using x86_64 as a host, >> so you're going to have to build in in a 32-bit virtual machine or by >> using mock. >> >> You'll have other problems too. gcc back then wasn't so standards- >> clean as it is now; we have a lot of warnings and better diagnostics >> that have allowed us to clean up gcc. I don't know why you got that >> particular message, and as I said I can't look at your logs. I might >> have a try myself to build gcc 2.95 later today. > > You can have success with only minor patching when you stage a 3.x > release inbetween and use that to compile 2.95. At least that is how > I created my 2.95 build ;) > > Richard. > >> Andrew.
