Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: David Nielsen <Lovechild@××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [WIP] gcc 3.3
Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 15:36:02
Message-Id: 1053099520.16399.2.camel@pilot.stavtrup-st.dk
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [WIP] gcc 3.3 by Spider
1 Just FYI, a few brave souls like myself have already been running GCC
2 3.3 of CVS for a period of time, and have found quite a few solutions to
3 common problems with GCC 3.3 and various packages.
4
5 There's a thread in Other things Gentoo on the forums that you might
6 want to read, I forgot the complete link and I lack a browser right now
7 so go search :)
8
9 On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 16:20, Spider wrote:
10 > begin quote
11 > On 16 May 2003 13:00:53 +0100
12 > Dhruba Bandopadhyay <dhruba@××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
13 > >
14 > > There is an ebuild for it on bugzilla and one here and some on forums
15 > > too. Have you used any of these as a definitive base or is this a new
16 > > creation?
17 >
18 > Neither, I wanted a go at it again (I haven't been messing with gcc
19 > since 3.1 days) so I started from last known working 3.2.3 and went on.
20 >
21 > > Also, is there any sign of this being entered into hardmasked or
22 > > testig state on portage?
23 >
24 > I'm not the maintainer of gcc, so I shall leave that up to Azarah to
25 > decide, let him distill the different builds along with his own
26 > experience to see what goes.
27 >
28 > >
29 > > I'd be quite keen on testing it out since I have had my fair share of
30 > > pentium4 problems and am desperately hoping an upgrade of gcc will
31 > > sort them out.
32 >
33 > It may, so far it appears some old c++ code will barf though. not sure
34 > about glibc and kernel issues either.
35 >
36 > >
37 > > Pardon my ignorance but have all these patches been commented out to
38 > > prevent resultant problems or because they are no longer necessary?
39 >
40 > Thats up to the maintainer, since I havent taken the time to go through
41 > the patches each in turn and verify wether it is needed anymore I just
42 > commented it out to see what happened. I suspect a lot of them are no
43 > longer necessary, and those that are will have to be re-diffed in a new
44 > manner, not really an easy task.
45 >
46 > I suspect the real build won't enter portage until propolice is up in
47 > speed though.
48 >
49 > //Spider
50 >
51
52
53 --
54 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list