From: Earnie B. <ear...@ya...> - 2001-12-27 16:49:09
|
"Steve D. Perkins" wrote: > > > The i686 version was compiled with the -march=i686 switch set which > > instructs GCC to use i686 optimizations not found in prior versions of > > the CPU. The i386 version was compiled with the -march=i386 switch set. > > Okay, I'm almost clear now... just wanted to be sure I understand this > fully (for the sake of future documentation). Despite the fact that the > Win32 (in "uname -a") returns "i686" for a first-generation Pentium, this > does NOT mean that this "-march=i686" switch targets the first-generation > Pentium. Is it therefore the case that this optimization flag targets the > Pentium Pro and up, or the Pentium II and up? I guess I'm a bit confused as > to what effect the Pentium Pro had on Intel's numbering system... since it's > kind of a "Pentium One-and-a-Half" in terms of timeline! > There are varying values that for the march switch that include 'pentium' in the context. These were special purpose for those varying differences of the i686. > > AFAIK, all ix86 systems thus far are 32 bit beginning with i386. > > Great, I'm getting on the same page now. I was initially confused as to > whether this build was targeting the next-generation 64-bit processor Intel > has available for testing... I had seen a few mentions of this in the > mailing lists. > Uhm, it can get worse, 64bit emulation can happen on a 32bit CPU. I believe this is what MS XP is doing when the CPU isn't 64bit capable. It is possible that the newer chips being produced are actually 64bit CPU's with 32bit emulation turned on via hardware switches. > > Perhaps we need to debug uname.cc. I'll work with you on this when I > > get back to the office. > > Perhaps that is the case. Certainly no crisis, it can wait until next > year. > > > Pain In The Ass. It's taken me years to get some of the jargon down > > to. So don't be afraid to ask or do a google.com search. > > LOL... by "google search", you're essentially telling me to RTFM? :) > It's more like UTFSE or STFMLA. > > Well Cygwin does too. Bourne and POSIX (IIRC) use the \ for character > > quoting. It requires two \\ to get one \. A \t is a tab, a \n is a > > newline, others have other meanings and those that don't have a special > > meaning just translate back to themselves. > > I understand that, I was just saying that there have been several > occasions when I've edited a Cygwin shell script using a Windows-based > editor (with the DOS-style line returns)... and Cygwin's bash had no problem > processing the script. I was just curious as to why the MSYS incarnation of > bash seems less forgiving. Again, not a crisis situation... but something > we'll probably hear repeated questions about in the mailing list down the > road. > This is yet another TODO. I want MSYS to be able to guess it's file mode at the time of the open. Then the \r\n won't matter. > > Shouldn't need to do this with MSYS as MSYS isn't going to distribute a > > gcc. > ... > > Only version 1.0.1 has gcc. > ... > > It's not supposed to be there in version 1.0.2. If it is that's a > > mistake. > > Bingo! The light bulbs are lighting up! Okay, you can disregard my > confusion about gcc's search directories, I was not aware that the instance > of gcc in question wasn't supposed to be there. The big picture just became > MUCH more clear! > > FYI, there is still a "gcc.exe". It's not in the 1.0.2 MSYS package, > but it IS in the latest version of msys-tools available on the SourceForge > site right now. There also appears to be the Fortran compiler in that > package, along with a "c++.exe" (I'm not sure what the relationship of that > executable is to "g++.exe", which isn't there). > Yea, that'll go away soon. > > > Are things currently setup this way to accommodate future plans, > > > bundling the MinGW compiler with the MSYS environment as a single > download? > > > > No, I don't think that would be wise. > > I'm not sure that I have an opinion on this one way or the other. > However, since I know it will be asked allot down the road... do you mind > sharing your reasoning there? > 1) Differing maintainers. 2) The package is bigger. 3) The package is more likely to be out-of-date with the releases of the pieces. 4) Requires more, `get this package and then upgrade it with this other package' type of responses in the list. > > > If it would be easier or faster to go > > > over this in real-time via phone or IM/IRC, I can arrange a time during > > > business hours or otherwise. > > > > > > > Hopefully won't be necessary. But if further down the road we still > > think it necessary, then I'm open. I don't have an IRC account, is > > there a good freebie? > > Oh, IRC doesn't work in the manner of requiring you to "register" for an > account. Instead, it's a bit more like "ham" amateur radio. You download a > freeware/shareware IRC client (the most popular is mIRC, at www.mirc.com), > and the participants involved agree on a network and channel to connect. > There are a nice handful of these networks open to public use, typically run > by universities and other non-profit institutions. > Thanks for the info. I'll look into this. > Of course, if there's only two or three of us at most that might be > connecting at any given time... it would probably be easier to just use one > of the popular instant-messenger clients. They are AOL Instant Messenger > (http://www.aolinstantmessenger.com), Yahoo Messenger > (http://messenger.yahoo.com), and MSN Messenger (http://messenger.msn.com). > With my family scattered across the world as they are, I maintain accounts > with all of these messenger clients... should the need ever arise for such a > thing. > I've refused to set any of these up so far. > > I'm not that "MinGW-experienced" either, just been with it for some > > length of time and I do notice those that do and those that have good > > intentions to do. There is a big difference. Without you and Danny I'd > > be a one man show about now. > > Ha, yeah... your work is much appreciated by many. Thanks, but I mean that I've not used the MinGW-GCC proactively. > Pardon my whining > earlier, I had just been banging my head against the desk trying to figure > out big picture... knowing that the MSYS gcc.exe I saw wasn't supposed to be > there has cleared things up. I'm glad the fog has lifted. Our working through the problems have given me ample fuel for the next release. > Of course, all the interaction with family > I've had this past week hasn't helped my capacity for dealing with > frustration, either! > Yea, can't live with `em and can't live without `em. Earnie. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com |