Tom writes:
> So, actually my first question is which version SHOULD I be interested in?
> Per the Jazz website at http://jazz.external.hp.com/src/gnu/gnuframe.html,
> there are three versions:
>
>  "egcs" 2.91.57 for 5.5 & 6.0
>  "gcc" 2.95.1 for 6.0 as is "thread safe"
>  "gcc" 2.95.2 for 6.0 and is NOT "thread safe" -- from the download page:

99% of all users should be interested in the 2.95.2 version.  The remaining
1% are likely to be internal HP customers working on threads-related code
(like the Java project).

>    "The g++ in this version does not produce thread safe
> exception handling
> code. If you know you need the thread safe exception handling, use the
> 2.95.1 version."
>
> I presume I want the latest version, BUT I know I want to experiment with
> "threaded" programs, so I'm thinking I need 2.95.1.

User-written threaded programs are not really supported yet on MPE, and
there are numerous problems that you may run into.  It is highly unlikely
that you really want to be playing with MPE kernel threads at the moment.
This may change in late 6.5 power patch versions and in 7.0.

> Of course, now that I
> re-read the warning on that page, I see it is talking about "g++" in
> particular, not C or C++, however, wouldn't a problem like that effect ALL
> of the compiled output?

g++ is the name of the program used to compile a C++ program using the GCC
compiler.  gcc is the name of the program used to compile a standard C
program.

> But that's a tangent to the problem -- I have a fresh install of
> MPE/iX 6.0,
> downloaded and de-tarred the gnucore & related files, ran through the
> installation instructions, and even the simplest compile [the old faithful
> "hello world"] fails with "cannot execute cpp - no such file" (or words to
> that effect)

AFAIK, this should have worked ok.  Perhaps there was a problem with your
$PATH not including /usr/local/bin?

> Realizing that the "problem" was the missing routine, I downloaded and
> de-tarred the 2.95.2 version, then using the ;KEEP option on the
> restore, I
> restored /usr/local/bin/@ -- two files were "found" that didn't exist from
> the 2.95.1 installation: cpp & ld.

Bad idea.  You should restore the full 2.95.2 without ;KEEP at the moment.
That should get everything working ok.  There are some patches to the new
'ld' program Mark wrote that are not packaged in the distribution yet, but
they should not be required for most ordinary C programs.

[...]

> However, that success was short lived -- this ONLY worked for MANAGER.SYS,
> when I logged on as my "normal" user ID, the exact same compile
> command went into the aforementioned loop...

:RESTOREing the full 2.95.2 should fix the permissions problems as well as
giving you a consistent and working version of the compiler.

G.

www.gccsupport.com