From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by neteng.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id KAA04781; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:11:30 -0700 Return-Path: Received: (from daemon@localhost) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) id RAA24241 for linux-list; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 17:11:26 GMT Received: from yon.engr.sgi.com (yon.engr.sgi.com [150.166.61.32]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id KAA24232; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:11:24 -0700 Received: (from ariel@localhost) by yon.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) id KAA14821; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:10:31 -0700 From: ariel@yon.engr.sgi.com (Ariel Faigon) Message-Id: <199606181710.KAA14821@yon.engr.sgi.com> Subject: Re: anyone know if this is true? To: lm@neteng.engr.sgi.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:10:31 -0700 (PDT) Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com, gcc@corp.sgi.com, tiemann@cygnus.com In-Reply-To: <199606181641.JAA03609@neteng.engr.sgi.com> from "Larry McVoy" at Jun 18, 96 09:41:47 am Reply-To: ariel@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME5a] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Sadly, it *is* true. I guess many more 6.2 pissed off customers are waiting down the pipeline. We can solve it by getting David Miller's development environment packaged as freeware, (it includes a GNU linker that works) and put it (really quick) outside the firewall for whoever is interested. 1) Someone with a couple of days of time needs to take this and just do it. I was planning on it, but I need another week or so to start. 2) I'm afraid we'll need to add crt[1n].o as binaries as these are *not* shipped with the headers and libraries of 6.2 Any comments, objections from anyone (especially for step 2) ? > >If it isn't true, can someone send mail to Tiemann and tell him the >facts. Sounds like we're getting bad press. > >------- Forwarded Message > >Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 05:22:52 -0700 >From: Michael Tiemann >To: lm@sgi.com >Subject: [comp.sys.sgi.apps] gcc part II > >Is this not fixed in 6.2? I upgraded my machine at home yesterday, and >it looked suspiciously like SGI was providing headers and libraries as >part of the std 6.2 release. > > From: jon@vcnet.com (Jon Rust) > Subject: gcc part II > Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi.apps > Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 22:25:34 -0700 > Organization: IAVC > Path: cygnus.com!kithrup.com!news.Stanford.EDU!agate!howland.reston.ans.net >!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.vcnet.com!jon.vc.net!user >Lines: 21 >Message-ID: >NNTP-Posting-Host: jon.vc.net >X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.2.0b4 > > Before I fly off the handle, I wanna make sure this is true. > > You can't build ***anything*** unless you fork over a huge wad of cash to > SGI for their compiler and dev enviro? > > **If** this is true, it's horseshit. No wonder SGI is so far down the food > chain in the land of UNIX. Buying SGI could be one of the biggest mistakes > I've made since openning my business over 15 months ago. I wonder if my 30 > days are up. Maybe I can ship it back. I only wish I'd bought [insert any > other UNIX platform here]. > > If it's not true, could someone plz point me in the right direction to get > gcc working so I can compile BIND, RADIUS, wuftpd, etc... > > pissed off with no build capability, > jon > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Jon Rust > Internet Access of Ventura County > jon@vc.net http://www.vc.net 805.383.3500 > >I know that gcc is not yet 6.2-friendly, but that's much more easily >fixed than the library/header problem. > >Michael > >------- End of Forwarded Message > -- Peace, Ariel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: ariel@yon.engr.sgi.com (Ariel Faigon) Message-ID: <199606181710.KAA14821@yon.engr.sgi.com> Subject: Re: anyone know if this is true? Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 10:10:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <199606181641.JAA03609@neteng.engr.sgi.com> from "Larry McVoy" at Jun 18, 96 09:41:47 am Reply-To: ariel@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com To: Larry McVoy Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com, gcc@corp.sgi.com, tiemann@cygnus.com Message-ID: <19960618171031.g0V9Z4qnQmOnfEyaluNHOlCmjoowVyoha-2w8MrAUhE@z> Sadly, it *is* true. I guess many more 6.2 pissed off customers are waiting down the pipeline. We can solve it by getting David Miller's development environment packaged as freeware, (it includes a GNU linker that works) and put it (really quick) outside the firewall for whoever is interested. 1) Someone with a couple of days of time needs to take this and just do it. I was planning on it, but I need another week or so to start. 2) I'm afraid we'll need to add crt[1n].o as binaries as these are *not* shipped with the headers and libraries of 6.2 Any comments, objections from anyone (especially for step 2) ? > >If it isn't true, can someone send mail to Tiemann and tell him the >facts. Sounds like we're getting bad press. > >------- Forwarded Message > >Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 05:22:52 -0700 >From: Michael Tiemann >To: lm@sgi.com >Subject: [comp.sys.sgi.apps] gcc part II > >Is this not fixed in 6.2? I upgraded my machine at home yesterday, and >it looked suspiciously like SGI was providing headers and libraries as >part of the std 6.2 release. > > From: jon@vcnet.com (Jon Rust) > Subject: gcc part II > Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi.apps > Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 22:25:34 -0700 > Organization: IAVC > Path: cygnus.com!kithrup.com!news.Stanford.EDU!agate!howland.reston.ans.net >!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.vcnet.com!jon.vc.net!user >Lines: 21 >Message-ID: >NNTP-Posting-Host: jon.vc.net >X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.2.0b4 > > Before I fly off the handle, I wanna make sure this is true. > > You can't build ***anything*** unless you fork over a huge wad of cash to > SGI for their compiler and dev enviro? > > **If** this is true, it's horseshit. No wonder SGI is so far down the food > chain in the land of UNIX. Buying SGI could be one of the biggest mistakes > I've made since openning my business over 15 months ago. I wonder if my 30 > days are up. Maybe I can ship it back. I only wish I'd bought [insert any > other UNIX platform here]. > > If it's not true, could someone plz point me in the right direction to get > gcc working so I can compile BIND, RADIUS, wuftpd, etc... > > pissed off with no build capability, > jon > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Jon Rust > Internet Access of Ventura County > jon@vc.net http://www.vc.net 805.383.3500 > >I know that gcc is not yet 6.2-friendly, but that's much more easily >fixed than the library/header problem. > >Michael > >------- End of Forwarded Message > -- Peace, Ariel