| 1 |
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 12:05 AM, Nicolas Pinto <nicolas.pinto@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> I was indeed using USE=vanilla to get gcc 4.5.3 to compile and it |
| 3 |
> appears that all my issues where caused by this useflag. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> So I removed this useflag and masked >sys-devel/gcc-4.2.4-r01. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
You shouldn't need to mask it (anymore), see bug 289757. Please test |
| 8 |
if you have time. |
| 9 |
-Jeremy |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Thanks a lot! |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Regards, |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Nicolas |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
| 19 |
>> On 23-10-2011 23:36:12 -0400, Martin Luessi wrote: |
| 20 |
>>> Did you by any chance emerge gcc with the "vanilla" useflag enabled? I |
| 21 |
>>> am asking since I had similar problems when I was installing |
| 22 |
>>> gentoo-prefix on CentOS a few weeks ago. Gcc 4.5.3 wouldn't compile |
| 23 |
>>> without the "vanilla" useflag enabled, so I enabled it. After that |
| 24 |
>>> many packages failed to compile since they were being linked against |
| 25 |
>>> system libraries instead of the prefix ones. What I did is mask gcc |
| 26 |
>>> versions that are too new (>4.2.4 in my case) to be compatible with |
| 27 |
>>> the CentOs glibc. |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> Oh, thanks for the hint. I guess we should either mask vanilla, or |
| 30 |
>> apply the critial prefix patches for this regardless of USE=vanilla. |
| 31 |
>> |
| 32 |
>> Mind filing a bug for this? |
| 33 |
>> |
| 34 |
>> Thanks a lot for the insight! |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
>> |
| 37 |
>> -- |
| 38 |
>> Fabian Groffen |
| 39 |
>> Gentoo on a different level |
| 40 |
>> |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> -- |
| 45 |
> Nicolas Pinto |
| 46 |
> http://web.mit.edu/pinto |
| 47 |
> |
Archives