[wgcc-dev] FW: Hey ho....

[Duft M. <Mar...@sa...>]

=20

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerker B=E4ck [mailto:jer...@te...]=20
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:25 PM
To: Duft Markus
Subject: RE: Hey ho....

Now I get it - you designed wgcc for building Win32 binaries, is that =
so? A tool to build for example FireFox on Windows using unix makefile =
tools with MS tools, right? Is wgcc really unable to build posix apps in =
current design? Did you ever consider using it to enhancing the cc =
script?=20

I would think building of posix apps is the real challenge here. Due to =
lack of proper information there are so many opinions how this should be =
made, what is possible and what is NOT possible. For me, the problem is =
that cc sometimes fails or doing the wrong thing (especially in =
configure scripts).
So it ends up in a tedious checkups of config.h and makefiles. As for =
cc, I found some bugs in SUA cc (mainly in the C++ part) and missing =
some compatibility with gcc and GNU. Even if the script is a really nice =
piece of work, it could be improved greatly. Problem is, not being a =
unix guy, the shell script insights is not one of my skills, nor do it =
interest me much either. Leaving us to a conclusion: A user maintained =
build tool for posix builds using MSC. I think wgcc could be an =
excellent candidate to that!

> port of the GNU libc (not c++) to win32 (_not_ interix)
You have that in cygwin (in contrast to mingw which mimics MSCRT and use =
native Win32) - checkout the cygwin source - you could probably build it =
with wgcc.

If you consider the complexity in SUA with posix, mixed mode, posix DLL, =
BSD libc DLL, safe CRT and MS C++ you surely could understand why I =
mention the need. I just hate the way the MS developers implemented the =
SDK build resources (/usr/lib). For example the start-up code you got: =
crt0.o crtdll.o crtexe.o crti.o mixcrt0.o safecrt0.o - all with some =
very secret holy code.
which one to choose? It's bound to get all sorts of dependency problems.

I will test wgcc as you proposed and intended.=20
I will also experiment with different builds - i.e. mixed mode. When I =
get a working posix app I could start testing using it as a cc =
replacement. I suspect this would require design changes - what are your =
reactions/interest of that?


Jerker

________________________________

From: Duft Markus [mailto:Mar...@sa...]
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 10:16 AM
To: Jerker B=E4ck; int...@li...
Subject: AW: Hey ho....


Hi!
=20
You really should _not_ install wgcc in /usr/local since then
/usr/local/include would be in the include path, and confuse cl.exe, =
since
those are _wrong_ headers.
=20
And you should realize, that wgcc really has nothing to do with posix =
builds
or anything. wgcc is a litlle tool to produce _native_ executables, =
means
there is no posix there, except when using the pxwc library. Then there =
is
just a bunch of functions so that the posix names are available on =
native
win32.
=20
in your .wgccrc you can specify the paths.c, paths.c++ and paths.linker. =
on
my system this is (detected automatically for a visual studio install):
=20
paths.c =3D /wamas/libtool/wgcc/installed/include
paths.c +=3D /dev/fs/C/vs7/Vc7/include
paths.c +=3D /def/fs/C7vs7/Vc7/PlatformSDK/include
paths.c++ =3D /wamas/libtool/wgcc/installed/include
paths.c++ +=3D /dev/fs/C/vs7/Vc7/include
paths.c++ +=3D /def/fs/C7vs7/Vc7/PlatformSDK/include
paths.linker =3D /wamas/libtool/wgcc/installed/lib
paths.linker +=3D /dev/fs/C/vs7/Vc7/lib
paths.linker +=3D /def/fs/C7vs7/Vc7/PlatformSDK/lib
=20
you should set this to something similar. In my opinion there is really =
no
need to port _anything_. the only thing that would be cool is a port of =
the
GNU libc (not c++) to win32 (_not_ interix).
=20
wgcc really does something different than cc. look at wcc from
interopsystems. this one should do something similar as wgcc. there is =
no
sense in even _thinking_ about cc when speaking of wgcc.
=20
Cheers, Markus

________________________________

Von: Jerker B=E4ck [mailto:jer...@te...]
Gesendet: Sa 23.09.2006 16:06
An: Duft Markus
Betreff: RE: Hey ho....



> Your .wgccrc is corrupt i think
No, I just have not specified the location of Win32 headers and libs
I realized that after a while - anyway here's the files

In my case I would specify the headers and libs from the Windows 2003 =
SP1
platform SDK. The VS 2003 PlatformSDK folder is outdated and the one =
shipped
with VS 2005 is the same as the SDK - I deleted both folders (which is
recommended BTW).

My path includes a complete set of MS tools and I also specified the
C89_COMPILER and C89_LINKER macros used in the cc script. The advantage =
of
using tools from the Windows DDK is that the installation is designed to =
be
used standalone and have some extra goodies (i.e. prefast debug builds).

Struggling with wgcc I run into some problems with SUA MS C++ (again). =
Since
all libs are release builds in SUA (without any debugging info), it's =
very
difficult to build debug builds of the app in question (not to even =
mention
the infamous VSAddin posix debugger). The library is also incomplete
compared with the original in VS 2005. So this led me to several =
attempts to
do a basic port of the MS C++ library (version 7.1 most preferable). I'm
tempted to get on with it again.

Any thoughts about this?

________________________________

From: Duft Markus [mailto:Mar...@sa...]
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 10:42 AM
To: Jerker B=E4ck; int...@li...
Subject: AW: Hey ho....