| 1 |
"Hemmann, Volker Armin" <volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de> posted |
| 2 |
200611060929.52020.volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de, excerpted below, |
| 3 |
on Mon, 06 Nov 2006 09:29:51 +0100: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> where is the logic with that? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> You don't need to do regularly --emptytree emerges. If you don't change |
| 8 |
> gcc you never need it. So why? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
That's the thing. I haven't done a full emerge --emptytree since at least |
| 11 |
gcc-4.1.0, which was never unmasked (it's 4.1.1 that's unmasked). I did |
| 12 |
one sometime after 4.0, I think during the 4.1.0 release candidates, but |
| 13 |
not since. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
As for doing it every gcc upgrade, that's a bit ridiculous when you are |
| 16 |
running the weekly gcc snapshots as I was between 4.0 and 4.1. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
So, everything on my system has been compiled with (I think) at least a |
| 19 |
4.1 release candidate or newer, but I haven't done a full --emptytree |
| 20 |
since 4.1.1 was released and unmasked, I know. Thus, particularly since |
| 21 |
I'm having that mysterious problem, it's time to do one, and see if the |
| 22 |
problem disappears. =8^) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 26 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 27 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives