site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev@lists.apple.com On 11 Oct 2006, at 05:06, Andrew Miller wrote: How do I go about getting a working build of ld? -- Graham J Lee http://www.thaesofereode.info/ _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.appl... 1) Is it true that all OSX boxes come with gcc / ld on them? No - they're part of the developer tools package. Is there no way you could depend on the developer tools? 2) How can I build an ld for maximum forwards and backwards compatibility? I have tried to build cctools-622.3, but it doesn't work just by running make (I get the following error): ../best_arch.c: In function `cpusubtype_combine': ../best_arch.c:478: error: `CPU_TYPE_VEO' undeclared (first use in this function) ../best_arch.c:478: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once ../best_arch.c:478: error: for each function it appears in.) ../best_arch.c:483: error: `CPU_SUBTYPE_VEO_1' undeclared (first use in this function) ../best_arch.c:484: error: `CPU_SUBTYPE_VEO_2' undeclared (first use in this function) grepping in /usr/include for CPU_TYPE_VEO doesn't find anything, and the situation is even worse for the SDKs in /Developer/SDKs/ (I would like to build against the oldest SDK possible). I can't find any mention of how to do this in any past postings to this list. The CPU_TYPE_VEO is definitely in the source code for xnu with 10.4.5 but you *could* just M-x comment-region (we all use emacs, right?) those parts of the switch/case where the VEO is referenced; after all you only really care about ppc, i386, and possibly the 64-bit variants. There's probably still some SPARC, PA_RISC and m68k/m88k code around if you look hard enough ;-) 3) It is okay to just grab the gcc / ld binaries from my system? When I downloaded Xcode, I had to click through a license saying I wouldn't redistribute it, but I have since seen a license on Apple's site which says it can be used on the terms of the Apple Public Source License, which allows me to redistribute the code: "2.1 Unmodified Code. You may use, reproduce, display, perform, internally distribute within Your organization, and Externally Deploy verbatim, unmodified copies of the Original Code, for commercial or non-commercial purposes, provided that in each instance:" ... I'm not from Apple, but the gcc and ld binaries *themselves* are definitely licensed in such a way as to be redistributable. In the case of gcc, you need to also make the source code available. In the case of cctools, you need to include a notice of the licence terms and describe how the source code may be obtained. Xcode of course is not does not have such a licence ;-) This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com