Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Python recompile
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2025 12:15:42 -0800
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <871pv861ht.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References: <vq1qas$j22$1@gallifrey.nk.ca> <vq3oag$18iv6$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq4hf2$1brf7$1@dont-email.me> <vq4l3d$1ck9e$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq4m0u$1ctpn$1@dont-email.me> <vq4n05$1d5dv$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq4om7$1dbo2$2@dont-email.me> <vq6dqh$1pskk$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq6f8p$1pmnk$1@dont-email.me> <vq6gqc$1qcp8$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq6ips$1pmnk$2@dont-email.me> <vq6j5h$1qosf$1@dont-email.me>
	<20250304092827.708@kylheku.com> <vq7g1p$1vmg5$1@dont-email.me>
	<vq94dt$2boso$1@dont-email.me> <vqcsk7$23bfo$1@paganini.bofh.team>
	<vqefn1$3flpt$1@dont-email.me> <vqeu5c$3imil$1@dont-email.me>
	<vqeun4$3iqbq$1@dont-email.me> <vqfcbe$3lkkc$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2025 21:15:44 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fe233383e8bda590fd9814f8824f4908";
	logging-data="3898784"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18IRQei/HTSiCBcZW2ahM0N"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xSrMdXqNhfEVWaCGnyE8sJvESmc=
	sha1:kgaLBCZIeE7CtuoU3l6Zh5SXysE=
Bytes: 4059

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> I just (well, nearly 2 hours ago!) downloaded the sources for gcc. It
> was 0.75GB in all, 142,000 files, 5,500 folders. There are 84,000 .c
> files, and 4,600 .h files.
>
> It took something over 90 MINUTES to unzip, using a SSD.

Whatever you downloaded, it wasn't (just) the sources for gcc.
The latest release of gcc (14.2.0) has 58503 .c files and 4131
..h files, and the gcc project does not make it available as a
..zip file.  When you say "the sources for gcc", I presume you're
referring to some software package that includes gcc.  Why didn't
you mention that?

On my system, unpacking gcc-14.2.0.tar.gz and gcc-14.2.0.tar.xz took
15 and 20 seconds, respectively.  I created a zip file; unzipping
it took 23 seconds.

Whatever is wrong with your system, I suggest it's not topical here.

The fact that somebody is providing gcc sources in a zip file
probably implies that it's intended to be built on Windows.  It's
likely that the providers of the zip file would have provided build
instructions.  Since I have no idea what package you downloaded,
I can't provide more information.  (Not that you asked.)

> I haven't started to look at what's involved in building it for
> Windows Actually I haven't got a clue how to go about it. Neither do I
> know how long it might take.
> 
> Is this what you mean by 'simpler'?

The gcc maintainers are not particularly interested in supporting
Windows (and are under no obligation to do so), so it's not
surprising that building it from source on Windows is awkward.
Complaining about it here is not useful.

From <https://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html> :

    GCC contains support for x86-64 using the mingw-w64 runtime library,
    available from https://www.mingw-w64.org/downloads/. This library
    should be used with the target triple x86_64-pc-mingw32.

and :

    Ports of GCC are included with the Cygwin environment.

    GCC will build under Cygwin without modification; it does not build
    with Microsoft’s C++ compiler and there are no plans to make it do
    so.

I've never tried to build gcc on Windows without using some Unix-like
emulation layer, so I can't help you with that (not that you asked).
I don't know whether it's possible.

[...]

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */