Message-ID:	<38125BF9.3142AD33@lycosmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 23 Oct 1999 21:08:09 -0400
From:	somebodyelse AT cyberdude DOT com
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Creation of gcc cross compilers for NT and Win95.
References:	<3 DOT 0 DOT 32 DOT 19990719212304 DOT 010f3790 AT pop DOT xs4all DOT nl> <19990720092251 DOT I263 AT cerebro DOT laendle>
Reply-To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com

Marc Lehmann wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 09:23:23PM +0100, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
> > i tried to make a cross compiler that ran under linux-PII450 that could
> > produce alpha executables, but after a few months i still didn't
> > succeed.
>
> Hmm, it should work fine, whats going wrong? (Of course, this list is not
> quite the right forum for cross compilers ;)
>
> > I'm still very interested in a cross compiler for the alpha, even
> > if that's only producing 32 bits code and not 64 bits.
>
> the cross compiler will quite happily produce 64 bit code, however it will be
> slower than a native compiler, if that is what you mean.
>

Why would it be slower code, as opposed to a gcc alpha compiler running on an
alpha processor?????
The output specs should be the same, except for the fact that pgcc is not exactly
an appropriate compiler for an alpha, with the fact that pgcc is aimed at
optimizing for the x86 platform. (Not to mean it won't work, but egcs/gcc-2.95.x
or greater would be better)

>
> --
>       -----==-                                             |
>       ----==-- _                                           |
>       ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
>       --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg AT goof DOT com      |e|
>       -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
>     The choice of a GNU generation                       |
>                                                          |

- Raw text -