Getting GNU toolchain working in TOS

[JonB]

Hi all

Trying to get GNU g++, debugger, make, lib, etc working on the ST.

Can anyone advise how best to do this? I keep trying FTP sites (there are many out there), but most of them don't seem to work, I can't login as a guest. Can you recommend a site please?

Does anyone use g++ on the ST? If so, do the supplied libraries have GEM / TOS calls?

I do have Megamax C up and running, but a) I've no documentation and b) I would like to do OOP on the ST with C++.

Cheers

JonB

[wongck]

Please read this thread, may give you some pointers

[simonsunnyboy]

If you are working for a plain ST, AHCC might be a better choice. The GNU toolchain requires a lot of program swapping from disk, that takes time, even with a harddisk.

AFAIK those who use the GNU toolchain these days, only do it from a crosscompilation environment on the PC/Mac and not natively on an Atari machine.

[jfl]

If you are working for a plain ST, AHCC might be a better choice. The GNU toolchain requires a lot of program swapping from disk, that takes time, even with a harddisk.

AFAIK those who use the GNU toolchain these days, only do it from a crosscompilation environment on the PC/Mac and not natively on an Atari machine.

I beg to differ: I use GCC on my Falcon almost daily and wouldn't have it any other way. Granted, it's a 060 with 512MB RAM, which is probably the minimum requirement for current GCC versions.

[JonB]

If you are working for a plain ST, AHCC might be a better choice. The GNU toolchain requires a lot of program swapping from disk, that takes time, even with a harddisk.

AFAIK those who use the GNU toolchain these days, only do it from a crosscompilation environment on the PC/Mac and not natively on an Atari machine.

No, it must be native, to retain that retro computing experience!

Is ACC a C++ compiler then?

[jfl]

If you are working for a plain ST, AHCC might be a better choice. The GNU toolchain requires a lot of program swapping from disk, that takes time, even with a harddisk.

AFAIK those who use the GNU toolchain these days, only do it from a crosscompilation environment on the PC/Mac and not natively on an Atari machine.

No, it must be native, to retain that retro computing experience!

Is ACC a C++ compiler then?

AHCC is a C compiler. For C++, only g++ is available on Atari, and you won't be able to use current versions on a ST, and certainly not under TOS. As for previous ones, I don't know, but you might want to look up Warwick Allison and GEM++ (C++ classes for GEM). Maybe he had some sort of g++ ported to the ST too.

[JonB]

There seem to be a load of FTP sites out there with TOS binaries for all the GNU toolchain.

So I need to try and work out what I need...

[mikro]

There seem to be a load of FTP sites out there with TOS binaries for all the GNU toolchain.

So I need to try and work out what I need...

Don't be silly. On normal ST it's unusable plus it's an awfully old version (2.8.x vs 4.7.x nowadays). So the compiler is most likely buggy, the C/C++ libs are probably buggy and if you think about STL or modern C++ features, just forget it, there weren't available in that time. Nobody will be able to help you with such ancient setup.

[JonB]

There seem to be a load of FTP sites out there with TOS binaries for all the GNU toolchain.

So I need to try and work out what I need...

Don't be silly. On normal ST it's unusable plus it's an awfully old version (2.8.x vs 4.7.x nowadays). So the compiler is most likely buggy, the C/C++ libs are probably buggy and if you think about STL or modern C++ features, just forget it, there weren't available in that time. Nobody will be able to help you with such ancient setup.

There is no need to be rude.

All STs are an "ancient setup". That's why we have a community, so we can ask questions and share knowledge. If you don't want to help, please don't post such discouraging messages...

[simonsunnyboy]

I fear mikro is right in desccribing that the GNU toolchain for plain TOS is severely outdated.
However you are hereby invitied to prove him wrong and maybe compile a more modern version with it.

At this point, it should be pretty clear, there are no users of the GNU toolchain on plain TOS around on this forum. So you can help the community by posting your own practical findings and solutions on it.

I personally would like to have a full native GNU toolchain for TOS that would run on 4MB ST class machines. My own attempts failed back in the past, maybe because I did insist on floppy usage back then. These days my personal favourite is AHCC, also because I personally don't see much benefit in using C++ over C for most embedded tasks (and ST programming is actually just a subdiscipline of programming embedded systems)

[JonB]

ST programming is actually just a subdiscipline of programming embedded systems

I don't agree 100% with you there, unless you mean "game programming", which generally needs a real time executive running behind the scenes. I think, other than that, there are very few similarities between the ST and an embedded computer, other than, say "its processor has a Von Neumann architecture" or some other generic microcomputer related statement. On the other hand, you may be referring to the need to be efficient with limited resources (memory, CPU cycles, I/O etc), in which case it is quite possible to write tight code in C++, as long as you keep inheritance hierarchies relatively simple, and don't try to be too clever with design patterns (that book has a lot to answer for).

What I actually want to do is resurrect a GEM program I wrote many years ago, and it really lends itself to a proper OO implementation. At the moment all I have is Megamax C with no documentation; sure, I could download some new compilers but I thought I might as well go the whole hog and go GNU. To be honest, I didn't realise these early versions were in such a state. I think porting the code itself would be a challenge, but that's the beauty of it - it is a hobby after all.

I'm happy to document my experiences here if you like, but I think I'd rather come at it from a kind of "this is how it works for me" angle rather than the opposite "why won't it work??". So my OP was to ask where the best place was to get the latest working binaries from.

So... what I did find was an archive with nine zip files. Some French chap had just copied his own (presumed working) GNU environment and put it on 9 floppies. Thes were uploaded somewhere. So, thinking it might help things, I grabbed and installed them. It sort of works, sort of, but not very well. I have bash, for example, but it dosn't seem to like the DOS text file mode of the ST, which leads to all sorts of problems when reading the bash.rc file. I have already got elvis (vi clone) but it really is sluggish (see my other thread on that one). Works well, otherwise. All of the normal *nix type commands appear to work, but redirection to a file and pipe joins in the shell are not working. Funny thing is, redirection is broken in my gulam shell too (despite the docs saying otherwise).

Oh well..

[simonsunnyboy]

The "this is how it works for me" angle is exactly what I meant. Describe what works for you, it seems it did not work for others sofar.

[wongck]

I'm happy to document my experiences here if you like, but I think I'd rather come at it from a kind of "this is how it works for me" angle rather than the opposite "why won't it work??". So my OP was to ask where the best place was to get the latest working binaries from.

Would be nice if you can add these findings, howtos into our AF wiki page on programming.
I have created a new section for you to start with called "Using GNU toolchain". Feel free to change those stubs as I have no idea how would be best for you to document it.
Thanks mate.

[JonB]

Nice one, wongck... ha ha, no pressure then...

[wongck]

sorry mate, no pressure. Just did not want your findings to float off to nowhere if they are not collected.

[joska]

Trying to get GNU g++, debugger, make, lib, etc working on the ST.

Unless you want to go insane - drop it. There are some old versions that's *can* be run on the ST, but that doesn't mean that it's usable. I have used these versions on a Falcon030 but quickly stopped. It's just too resource hungry.

If you want to develop programs in C++ for the ST I strongly recommend cross-compiling on a more powerful machine. Using ARAnyM is also a very good option, then you would atleast run the compiler under TOS/MiNT.

If you want to use an OO programming language on a ST there's not many choices. In fact, I can only think of one language and that's Pure Pascal. PP will be usable on a ST with atleast 4Mb and a harddrive of some sort.

[christos]

I believe there's also an OO extension for gfa basic. Other than that I'd agree with joska (didn't know pp was object oriented btw).

[JonB]

Unless you want to go insane - drop it. There are some old versions that's *can* be run on the ST, but that doesn't mean that it's usable. I have used these versions on a Falcon030 but quickly stopped. It's just too resource hungry.

Ummm... Err... Sounds like the "nays" have it! I haven't actually got g++ to do anything more than tell me the version, it keeps exiting with a value of 1 to the shell (i.e., abnormally). Been hacking about with bash as well; seems OK but has some wierdness around interpreting the bash.rc file (CR/LF problem I think).

As I said before, this is just for fun... I might try getting BusyBox compiled; I think it might offer something better than "good old Gulam"..

[JonB]

I believe there's also an OO extension for gfa basic. Other than that I'd agree with joska (didn't know pp was object oriented btw).

Oooh OO GFA Basic? Sounds like a great deal of fun!

[rudis]

OT/OB-LIB from RUN-Software