| 1 |
Peter Humphrey <prh@××××××××××.uk> posted |
| 2 |
200609251541.50248.prh@××××××××××.uk, excerpted below, on Mon, 25 Sep |
| 3 |
2006 15:41:50 +0000: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> So now I must restore the whole system from the backup I took just before |
| 6 |
> starting the GCC upgrade and start again. See you next year... |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
If you trust me not to pull some weird trick (I wouldn't, but hey, for all |
| 9 |
you know I'm just some guy on a list, do you know me well enough to trust? |
| 10 |
I'm not sure I'd trust a guy on the list in your spot, maybe depends on how |
| 11 |
desperate I was), I have binpkgs of the following gcc versions I could |
| 12 |
mail you: |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
3.4.4-r1 |
| 15 |
3.4.5-r1 |
| 16 |
3.4.6 |
| 17 |
3.4.6-r1 |
| 18 |
4.0.2-r3 |
| 19 |
4.0.3 |
| 20 |
4.1.1 |
| 21 |
4.1.1-r1 |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Of course, those 4.0.x versions were never unmasked... but I |
| 24 |
package.unmasked and ran them anyway, with 3.4.x as a backup and 4.1.x as |
| 25 |
the main system compiler after it came out. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
That does explain why your eselect-compiler could say 4.1.1 yet you were |
| 28 |
having problems as if it was 3.4.x. If 3.4.x was the only one on your |
| 29 |
system... |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 33 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 34 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives