This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Serious problems accessing cvs


> 
> David O'Brien <obrien@NUXI.com> writes:
> 
> > The following binaries are available, so Modula-3 must have been
> > available on them.  I am not claining that CVSup is available for
> > platform someone might want it for.  But the list below would probably
> > cover 80% of the GCC CVS consumers.
> 
> If they're willing to use binaries.  I'll raise the point that I generally
> raise when CVSup comes up, namely that I've been through the process of
> compiling Modula-3 and CVSup using the recommended Modula-3 compiler on a
> Solaris system and I'm not ever going to do that again.  It was the single
> most painful build that I think I've ever had to do.
> 
> If they've now released a Modula-3 compiler that doesn't have hardcoded
> dependencies on /usr/ucblib and the local X libraries, that uses standard
> autoconf, and that, if it must build its own make replacement as it goes,
> it at least doesn't attempt to *install itself* as part of the compilation
> process, then definitely CVSup is a nice product that should be
> considered.  But I couldn't recommend the experience I had.
> 
> Alternatively, if the above sounds absolutely nothing like the experience
> of anyone else who's built the Modula-3 compiler, may I suggest
> documentation improvements?  :)

Speaking with my heart, I've been through the exercise after hearing
the wonders of CVSup.  Especially on system like QNX were the default
compiler is Watcom, absolute Hell.

-- 
au revoir, alain
----
Aussi haut que l'on soit assis, on est toujours assis que sur son cul !!!


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]