Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/03/20/10:21:39
On Wed, 19 Mar 1997, Casey Corcoran wrote:
> Thanks for the info. I understand that I can't use MSVC to compile djgpp,
> but I am, so far, only trying to use Nmake.
But you *are* using the Makefile from the GCC distribution, right? So
you *are* trying to compile GCC with MSVC, and I think GCC cannot be
compiled with that compiler for the DJGPP configuration. One of the
problems is that compiling DJGPP requires support for long command
lines (longer than DOS 126-character limit) and other small
nuisances. DJGPP tools all support these features in a coherent
manner so that Makefiles which originally came from Unix work almost
automatically. I doubt that Nmake supports all these features, so it
most probably won't work.
I don't have the GCC source distribution handy, so I cannot look up
the passages that you are quoting about Nmake. However, I suspect
that the only way to use Nmake and MSVC to compile GCC would be on
Windoes/NT platforms with Cygnus Win32 tools, which solve the problems
that I mentioned above.
> My goal is to port the djgpp sources to MSVC, but I must first make it
> using the makefile so that all of the include files, etc. I need for my
> project workspace are constructed.
Why would you want to port djgpp sources to MSVC when DJGPP already
exists, is a working compiler for which you can easily get
pre-compiled binaries, and comes with a complete development
environment? Why do you need an MSVC port when you could just use
DJGPP for whatever you need to do?
> If you think my approach is flawed to begin with, I would be grateful if
> you (or anyone who knows the inner workings and hidden mechanisms of
> djgpp/gcc) could point me in a more sane direction.
Please explain a bit more about the reason which led you to believe
that porting DJGPP to MSVC is the way to go.
- Raw text -