[gccsdk] Ports needing Love

Peter Naulls peter at chocky.org
Mon Nov 9 07:45:51 PST 2009

alan buckley wrote:
>> Peter Naulls wrote on 5th Nov 2009ish

> The first group (I think there was probably only one) I
> still don't want to package.
> The second group if there are any that now compile and
> run OK I'm happy to have a go at packaging them if you can
> let me know what they are.
> The third group again I'd be happy to create the packaging
> information for them, but I wouldn't want to if it steps
> on the toes of the people who did the original ports.
> Of the last group, if anyone can find the source I'd have
> a go at compiling and packaging them.

Well, last time I tried (a few months ago) all the games in the
autobuilder compiled.  Some stuff has mad more recent and
specific attention, but many things need packaging, and
most things could do with a test.   Right now, I'm looking
at lincity, which has some windowing issues.

If there's any specific package you have concerns about,
then we'll take a closer look, and try to work with whoever.
In some cases, I expect the original RO porter is simply not
interested (e.g OpenTTD), so as long as we make this clear,
there shouldn't be a problem.

> I'm now entirely set up for GCC4 only, so I assume I'd need
> to have the latest UnixLibrary put in a package as well. Is
> this the case or will the version used with GCC3 work with
> GCC4 compiled programs as well? Are we at a position where
> there is a stable UnixLib for GCC4 that can be used to
> replace the one on the current riscpkg site for use with GCC3?

I talked to John about this yesterday; the last 4.1 release
was ok, but still marked beta and was some time ago, but
is okish.  I updated 'make' which had a bad patch, and we still
need some examples for shared libraries for the documentation.
However, I don't think this should prevent anything you mention.
There may yet be shared library issues (e.g. Firefox), but
I haven't been able to check that, and I don't think there
are any known technical issues that stop a release.

> I wanted to get the latest version of Wesnoth to work, but
> unfortunately for me they've started using the cairo library
> which there isn't a RISC OS port for. Peter I don't know
> if you've managed to get anywhere with cairo yet, but if
> you've got as far as getting a basic RISC OS framework to
> compile I'd like to have a look and see if I could contribute.

No, only what I hacked up quite some time ago:


> For a while I've been trying to write a alternative front end
> to RiscPkg, but unfortunately I keep ending up with crashes
> which may or may not be from GCC4's exception handling.
> At the moment I'm going through another period of giving up
> on it, but if anyone would like to have a look at where I've
> got to so far, let me know and I'll try to put it up on my
> drobe webspace. If it looks like it's worth pursuing to
> others I may get my enthusiasm for it back.

You don't want to just check it into the RiscPkg svn?  Either
mainline as work in progress, or into its own branch?

More information about the gcc mailing list