Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/10/08/16:41:20
Joel Hunsberger (jhunsberger AT i2k DOT com) wrote:
: I have had gcc 2.8.1 from the DJGPP collection installed for about 8
: months... and my configuration was set up as a standard installation, with
: C:\DJGPP\BIN and C:\DJGPP\RSXNTDJ\BIN in the path. All is well.
: More recently, I obtained a CD of the GNAT Ada installation, supposedly
: produced under the GNU license procedures... etc.. (I am not an expert in
: all the GNU family heritage.)
...
: From the DJGPP version of gcc.exe:
: GCC EXE 130,560 10-22-98 4:31p gcc.exe
: > gcc -v
: Reading specs from C:/DJGPP/RSXNTDJ/lib/specs
: gcc version 2.8.1
: Now, from the GNAT distribution of gcc.exe:
: GCC EXE 52,736 01-21-99 5:37p gcc.exe
: > gcc -v
: Reading specs from C:\GNAT\lib\gcc-lib\pentium-mingw32msv\2.8.1\specs
: gcc version 2.8.1
: So, you see, they both claim to be version 2.8.1, yet (in a totally isolated
: environment... gcc executed in a temp directory, with the path only pointing
: to my new \GBIN) these executables, when run from the command line, SAY THEY
: ARE THE SAME VERSION, but come up with specs from DIFFERENT paths.
Yes and on my Solaris box :
# gcc -v
Reading specs from /opt/local/gnu/lib/gcc-lib/sparc-sun-solaris2.5.1/2.95.1/spec
s
gcc version 2.95.1 19990816 (release)
On my QNX :
# gcc -v
Reading specs from /usr/qnx4/lib/gcc-lib/i386-unknown-qnx/2.8.1/specs
gcc version 2.8.1
: I can see that these binaries have to be different, but I am at a loss as to
: how to underrstand what GNU supporters mean when they say that (e.g.) gcc is
: at version 2.8.1, yet two similarly named binaries obviously have different
: contents.
The gnu developper does not give away binaries, it is up to the distributors
or yourself to setup things according to your needs. For example
the gcc people make a release, say 2.8.1, this will be pickup
by various distribution, RedHat, Suse, DJGPP, Cygwin, etc ..
and they setup the hardcoded paths, specs, differentely.
Aside from the fact the paths, configs are different,
both compilers should generate the same code. Now the size maybe
different because of different binary formats, startup code, etc ..
: Secondly, I see that to host both these environments (which I may not want
: to do), I will have to keep the distributions in different directories, and
: if I want to run DJGPP gcc, that will have to come first in the path, but if
: I want to run the GNAT package (reliably ??) then GNAT will have to come
: first in the path.
: Does anyone have any suggestions, or observations on this point?
You could have script files that will setup the path accordingly.
export PATH=/DJGPP/bin:$PATH
export PATH=/GNAT/bin:$PATH
You could rename the executables for example gdb to gnatgdb etc ..
You could stick to one version of the gnu tools ;-)
I don't of any "clean" solutions without playing the paths, but then
again I do not have any DOS background.
--
au revoir, alain
----
Aussi haut que l'on soit assis, on est toujours assis que sur son cul !!!
- Raw text -