On Sun, 2004-01-18 at 13:57, Kumba wrote:
> Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> 
> > Not sure, but I would like to get gcc-3.3.2-r5 or so in as well.  Is
> > this still possible ?
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> 
> I'm building mips stages with gcc-3.3.2-r4.  -r5 will not merge on my 
> Indy, although other mips users (with roughly the same Indy specs I 
> have) have reported success with that version of gcc.  It keeps getting 
> to a C++ source file in the final stages of gcc's bootstrap, and just 
> hangs the compile up.  Doesn't hang the box, and no error messages or 
> zombified processes that I can find.  Still doing research into the 
> cause, I'm beginning to think I have something funny going on with the 
> chroot environment.
> 

Even 3.3.2-r4 is fine (and was longer tested), but the point is, we need
a 3.3.x out, as there is a _lot_ of pentium4 fixes, as well as others.
I will do -r6 in a bit, maybe you can give it a bit of testing on your
indy.

> As for sparc, we've been using the gcc33-sparc64-1.4 profile to test 
> gcc-3.3.x on sparc.  Whether it is safe enough to declare stable, I'll 
> let Weeve make that call.
> 

Ill wait for him then.

> x86, I've had no problems really.  Just we need to get the new etcat 
> version out because gcc-3.3.2-r5 scans for the @guard symbols, and older 
> etcat versions do not work with the newer 2.0.50 portage, causing the 
> ebuild to fail (this has been my experience on sparc64 actually, but I 
> would not be surprised for this to popup up elsewhere for those who 
> haven't upgraded gentoolkit yet (like me)).
> 

Right, lanius (whoever), any eta on the new etcat?


Also, any definate reasons on the PPC lag in gcc versions?  They do not
even have 3.3.x in testing ....


Thanks,

-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa