On Thu, 2009-01-08 21:57:50 -0800, Matt Thomas
<matt%3am-software.com@localhost> wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2009, at 12:35 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-01-08 21:29:38 +0100, Johnny Billquist
> > <bqt%softjar.se@localhost> wrote:
> > >
> > > The VAX support in gcc is probably better now that it have been
> > > in quite a while. Big kudos to the people (I suspect Matt
> > > Thomas) for getting that done. However, gcc itself is getting so
> > > slow it's just not fun to even joke about anymore.
> > >
> > > But apart from that, it's my view that the kernel and various
> > > subsystems around that have degenerated since 4.0.
> >
> > That's all true for NetBSD CVS, but not for upstream GCC. The
> > recently introduced new register allocator needs (for VAX:
> > probably only minor) changes. These haven't been done up to now
> > and the VAX port, once again, is a target proposed for removal in
> > upstream GCC.
>
> I have gcc-trunk working with all the changes. But with all the
> changes it's a massive diff (3K+ lines) and the needed ChangeLog
> entry scares me.
I'm impressed! Would you publish a diff? With a bit of luck, at least
some parts will break out easily. (And it would help me personally
quite a bit.)
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw%lug-owl.de@localhost
+49-172-7608481
Signature of: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html
the second :
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature