Issues in installing 2.1

I have just downloaded SmartEiffel 2.1 from the primary web site,
and am trying to install it (in a test area).
The machine is a SunBlade 100 (UltraSPARC II) running Solaris 2.9.
gcc is 2.95.2, although I have 3.3.2 available as "new gcc".

The READ_ME says
    Chose some place on the disk to unpack the se.tgz archive:
    cd InstallationDirectory; gunzip se.tgz ; tar xvf se.tar

In fact the file arrived as SmartEiffel-2-1.tgz, not se.tgz
What I actually did was

    cd /users/local/src
    gzcat SmartEiffel-2-1.tgz | tar xvf -

    Update your .cshrc (or equivalent) file with the following line:
    setenv PATH your/installation/directory/SmartEiffel/bin:$PATH

I misread this.  In retrospect, this is because I couldn't believe
that I would have to change my ~/.cshrc in order to *install* a program.
This is rather unusual.  I simply started a new csh and made the change
in that.  This didn't work, and after floundering around for a while,
simply scrapped the SmartEiffel directory and contents and started again.
This time I did exactly what I was told and added a line
    setenv PATH /users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin:$PATH
to my ~/.cshrc

    Then, in a freshly created shell window, just type:
    cd your/installation/directory; cd SmartEiffel; make interactive

"shell window"?  Why does it have to be a new *window*?  I just started
up a fresh csh (in the right directory) and ran 'make interactive'.
I answered all the questions by pressing the Enter key.  The build phase
looked like
    Summary of gathered options:
      - C mode:     boost
      - C compiler: gcc
      - C options:  (compiler) -pipe -O2
		    (linker)   

    Here we go!

    System call "gcc -pipe -O2 -c -x c compile_to_c1.c".
...
    System call "gcc -pipe -O2 -c -x c compile_to_c35.c".
    System call "gcc -o compile_to_c compile_to_c[1-9].o compile_to_c[1-2][0-9].o compile_to_c3[0-5].o -x none -lm ".
    System call "/users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/compile_to_c -boost -no_gc -relax -o compile_to_c compile_to_c".
    Received signal 11.
    Eiffel program crash at run time.
    No trace when using option "-boost"
    Last system call failed (error reported).
    System call "/users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/compile_to_c -boost -no_gc -relax -o compile_to_c compile_to_c" failed.
    System call "/users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean compile_to_c".
    sh: /users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean: not found
    Last system call failed (error reported).
    System call "/users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean compile_to_c" failed.
    System call "/users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean compile".
    sh: /users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean: not found
    Last system call failed (error reported).
    System call "/users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean compile" failed.
    System call "/users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean clean".
    sh: /users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean: not found
    Last system call failed (error reported).
    System call "/users/local/src/SmartEiffel/bin/clean clean" failed.

    *** There have been errors during the install of SmartEiffel. Sorry :-(
    
This is exactly the same way that the build failed when I set $PATH in
a new csh instead of in ~/.cshrc.  I notice that there are error messages
from 'sh' saying it couldn't find this or that.  To be absolutely sure, I
had also set $PATH in my ~/.profile.

sh is 100% correct here.  At this stage in the build process,
.../SmartEiffel/bin contains
    compile_to_c     compile_to_c1.c  compile_to_c3.c  READ_ME
    compile_to_c.h   compile_to_c2.c  compile_to_c4.c
and there is indeed no 'clean' there at all.

But perhaps that's because of the crash.  Perhaps it should be recompiled
without boost mode, or with a completely different C compiler.

Threading my way through install.c's menus, I found myself bothered by
the fact that "go up a level" had a different magic code every time.
It would be nice if "return to parent menu" was always [0].

When I tried to select the C compiler, I found myself *very* confused.
The C compiler on my system is called 'cc'.  When I'm asked what C
compiler I want, I say 'cc'.  Then I'm told this is ambiguous!  But
'cc' is the full and complete name of the C compiler!  There is a list
of C compiler names, amongst which I see 'cc-openvms' and 'cc-unix',
but that's no help to me, because I do not have any C compiler called
cc-unix!

Eventually, with some trepidation, I selected cc-unix.
Then it said
    This compiler has no known C++ capabilities.
     In order to compile C++ programs, please also pick a C++ compiler.

    Type <Enter> if you don't know what this is all about.

    Please enter the new value of the default C++ compiler:
      none, vpcc, cl, <gcc>, icc, wcl386, bcc32
The traditional name for C++ compilers on Unix is CC.  Why is this not
listed?  Not that it matters; if I wanted to compile C++, I wouldn't
be installing Eiffel...

Having set my C compiler to be 'cc' with option '-O', I then started
[5] install again.  It told me that the most was 'boost'; I set that
to all_check, but that has no discernable effect on the C compilations,
    System call "cc -O -c compile_to_c3.c".
and the like.

However, this seemed to work.  So SmartEiffel-2-1 installed OK with
C compiler = /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc (Sun WorkShop 6 update 2 C 5.3 2001/05/15)
but failed with GCC 2.95.2.