From: alex.buell@munted.eu   
      
   On Mon, 2024-09-02 at 13:10 +0100, mm0fmf wrote:   
   > On 01/09/2024 21:36, Single Stage to Orbit wrote:   
   > > On Sun, 2024-09-01 at 15:47 +0100, mm0fmf wrote:   
   > > > STR the compiler was a custom version of gcc 1.xx. 26 years ago   
   > > > so the exact version has evaporated from my memory.   
   > >    
   > > Your dates are slightly off. These gcc 1.x versions were between   
   > > 1987 - 1993. I do remember using 2.7.2.3 with Linux 2.0 in 1997.   
   >    
   > I'd agree that gcc main line release would be around 2.7 in 1998. I   
   > can remember I started writing software for a Strongarm based video   
   > security system in 2001. By then ARM kernels were compiled/cross-   
   > compiled with gcc 2.95.x. Then gcc 3.0 / 3.1 came out which was   
   > better for userland code but kernels compiled with it would not run   
   > so we stayed with 2.95  for some time.   
      
   Now, this I do definitely do remember. Stuck on 2.95.3 for years for   
   the kernel, whilst we were able to use newer compilers just for the   
   userspace. Linus kept running into code generation bugs and his rants   
   were gold! :-D   
      
   Also the great libc5 / glibc2 switch over which caused me a few   
   nightmares :-)   
      
   > However, the SHARC stuff was definitely derived from gcc 1.x in 1998   
   > as it struck me as very old as 2.x had been out for a while by then.    
   > This was the version of the compiler that ran on Windows. ISTR I used   
   > a PII 200MHz probably running WinNT to develop on. The Unix systems   
   > were reserved for ADA, Occam and other esoteric stuff ;-)   
      
   Yeah, that'd be right. Some people do keep old toolchains around   
   because it's the only way to build code for platforms that have gone   
   the way of the Dodo.    
   --    
   Tactical Nuclear Kittens   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)