Date:	Sat, 17 Aug 1996 13:20:18 +0800 (GMT)
From:	Orlando Andico <orly AT gibson DOT eee DOT upd DOT edu DOT ph>
To:	Edevaldo Pereira Silva Júnior <edevaldo AT sysnetway DOT com DOT br>
cc:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Building GCC with DJGPP sources.
In-Reply-To:	<32155DBE.9EF@sysnetway.com.br>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SGI.3.93.960817131617.1521A-100000@gibson.eee.upd.edu.ph>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Fri, 16 Aug 1996, Edevaldo Pereira Silva J=FAnior wrote:

> =09 I'm trying to build GCC in a DOS machine, and the XGCC.EXE file,=20
> the stage one compiler, is much larger than GCC.EXE that comes with=20
> DJGPP. Can I use XGCC.EXE?

The reason XGCC is much bigger than your original GCC is because it's the
stage 1 output. By default, it is compiled without optimizations, and with
debugging flags set. This is because the stage 1 compiler is supposed to
have been compiled with your system's pcc. Some compilers (like the old
SunOS 4.x cc) are braindead and can't handle -O.

Technically, because you're building GCC with GCC, you don't even need to
do a stage 2 compile. Try something like this in the home directory:

  make LANGUAGES=3Dc,c++,objc CFLAGS=3D-O2

maybe that'll work.. or, modify the makefile and remove the '-g' flag and
replace it with a '-O2' flag.

In any case, you can use XGCC, only it's gonna be slower (because
optimizations were not used) and it's big. You can strip it to make it
smaller. Recall though that GCC is just the driver, and rather small.

The really big executables are CC1.EXE, CC1PLUS.EXE, and CC1OBJ.EXE, these
are bloated (probably hitting 4Meg apiece on your stage 1 compile). You
can strip these too before using.

Cheers!


----
Orlando Andico                           http://gibson.eee.upd.edu.ph/~orly=
/
orly AT gibson DOT eee DOT upd DOT edu DOT ph                "Who knows what's going to happen=
,
IRC Lab/EE Dept/UP Diliman     lottery or car crash, or you'll join a cult.=
"

- Raw text -