gcc for 4d1-3.x - SGI

This is a discussion on gcc for 4d1-3.x - SGI ; Now this is a real strange request - if anybody is interested I can elaborate on why I ask. Does anybody have any version of gcc as a binary for 4d1-3.x? Actually I'm not expecting that anybody has, but it ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: gcc for 4d1-3.x

  1. gcc for 4d1-3.x

    Now this is a real strange request - if anybody is interested
    I can elaborate on why I ask. Does anybody have any version of
    gcc as a binary for 4d1-3.x?

    Actually I'm not expecting that anybody has, but it doesn't hurt
    to ask and if someone really has it will probably help me a lot.


    Gerhard

  2. Re: gcc for 4d1-3.x

    In article ,
    Gerhard Lenerz wrote:
    :Now this is a real strange request - if anybody is interested
    :I can elaborate on why I ask. Does anybody have any version of
    :gcc as a binary for 4d1-3.x?

    You'd need the complete glibc -- in that timeframe, gcc
    wasn't compatible with SGI's libraries.

    As I recall, you also need the SGI headers; I believe the only way to
    get them in that timeframe was with the SGI compiler.

    Question: do you mean 3.0, 3.1, or do you mean 3.2 or 3.3 ?
    I seem to remember reading in the archives that that very early on,
    SGI included a compiler, but that was gone by 3.2 my Alzheimer's is
    telling me. 3.0 and 3.1 are pretty hard to find now; I'm not sure
    my archives go back as far as 3.2, but I believe I have some 3.3 tapes.
    --
    "Mathematics? I speak it like a native." -- Spike Milligan

  3. Re: gcc for 4d1-3.x

    On 14 Nov 2003 01:10:27 GMT, Walter Roberson wrote:
    > You'd need the complete glibc -- in that timeframe, gcc
    > wasn't compatible with SGI's libraries.


    Sounds like I'm heading for trouble... again.

    > As I recall, you also need the SGI headers; I believe the only way to
    > get them in that timeframe was with the SGI compiler.


    At that point I'm in luck. The system has a working compiler installed,
    which I confirmed by trying something small (gzip).

    > Question: do you mean 3.0, 3.1, or do you mean 3.2 or 3.3 ?


    I was thinking about 3.3 but I wonder if it makes sense to go a bit
    further back - just for compatibility reasons.

    > I seem to remember reading in the archives that that very early on,
    > SGI included a compiler, but that was gone by 3.2 my Alzheimer's is
    > telling me. 3.0 and 3.1 are pretty hard to find now; I'm not sure
    > my archives go back as far as 3.2, but I believe I have some 3.3 tapes.


    I do have 3.1 tapes - as well as Development Option tapes for 3.1
    so I assumed SGI always shipped 4D1/IRIX without a full development
    environment.

    801-0023-001C 1989 1 4D1-3.1 Execution Only Tape 1
    801-0023-001C 1989 2 4D1-3.1 Execution Only Tape 2
    801-0025-001C 1989 2 4D1-3.1 Development System Tape

    I only hope tape #1 wasn't among the very few ones I couldn't read.


    Gerhard

  4. Re: gcc for 4d1-3.x

    Gerhard Lenerz wrote:

    > On 14 Nov 2003 01:10:27 GMT, Walter Roberson wrote:
    > > You'd need the complete glibc -- in that timeframe, gcc
    > > wasn't compatible with SGI's libraries.

    >
    > Sounds like I'm heading for trouble... again.
    >
    > > As I recall, you also need the SGI headers; I believe the only way to
    > > get them in that timeframe was with the SGI compiler.

    >
    > At that point I'm in luck. The system has a working compiler installed,
    > which I confirmed by trying something small (gzip).
    >
    > > Question: do you mean 3.0, 3.1, or do you mean 3.2 or 3.3 ?

    >
    > I was thinking about 3.3 but I wonder if it makes sense to go a bit
    > further back - just for compatibility reasons.
    >
    > > I seem to remember reading in the archives that that very early on,
    > > SGI included a compiler, but that was gone by 3.2 my Alzheimer's is
    > > telling me. 3.0 and 3.1 are pretty hard to find now; I'm not sure
    > > my archives go back as far as 3.2, but I believe I have some 3.3 tapes.

    >
    > I do have 3.1 tapes - as well as Development Option tapes for 3.1
    > so I assumed SGI always shipped 4D1/IRIX without a full development
    > environment.
    >
    > 801-0023-001C 1989 1 4D1-3.1 Execution Only Tape 1
    > 801-0023-001C 1989 2 4D1-3.1 Execution Only Tape 2
    > 801-0025-001C 1989 2 4D1-3.1 Development System Tape
    >
    > I only hope tape #1 wasn't among the very few ones I couldn't read.
    >
    > Gerhard


    i have the IDO for 3.3.2 if that helps. i distcp'd them to cd.


  5. Re: gcc for 4d1-3.x

    Gerhard Lenerz wrote in message news:...
    > On 14 Nov 2003 01:10:27 GMT, Walter Roberson wrote:
    > > You'd need the complete glibc -- in that timeframe, gcc
    > > wasn't compatible with SGI's libraries.

    >
    > Sounds like I'm heading for trouble... again.
    >
    > > As I recall, you also need the SGI headers; I believe the only way to
    > > get them in that timeframe was with the SGI compiler.

    >
    > At that point I'm in luck. The system has a working compiler installed,
    > which I confirmed by trying something small (gzip).
    >
    > > Question: do you mean 3.0, 3.1, or do you mean 3.2 or 3.3 ?

    >
    > I was thinking about 3.3 but I wonder if it makes sense to go a bit
    > further back - just for compatibility reasons.
    >
    > > I seem to remember reading in the archives that that very early on,
    > > SGI included a compiler, but that was gone by 3.2 my Alzheimer's is
    > > telling me. 3.0 and 3.1 are pretty hard to find now; I'm not sure
    > > my archives go back as far as 3.2, but I believe I have some 3.3 tapes.

    >
    > I do have 3.1 tapes - as well as Development Option tapes for 3.1
    > so I assumed SGI always shipped 4D1/IRIX without a full development
    > environment.
    >
    > 801-0023-001C 1989 1 4D1-3.1 Execution Only Tape 1
    > 801-0023-001C 1989 2 4D1-3.1 Execution Only Tape 2
    > 801-0025-001C 1989 2 4D1-3.1 Development System Tape
    >
    > I only hope tape #1 wasn't among the very few ones I couldn't read.
    >
    >
    > Gerhard


    i have 3.3.2 on cd using distcp to make copies of the tapes since
    i was having problems loading from tape. I have IDO, even fortran :0)

    (did i reply to this already.... i forget...)

+ Reply to Thread