1 |
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 11:33:07 +0000 |
2 |
Sven Vermeulen <swift@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Hi guys |
5 |
> |
6 |
> There is some FUD regarding GCC upgrades and I don't have the proper |
7 |
> knowledge to write a correct document on GCC upgrades. As you are currently |
8 |
> aware, we have a GCC upgrade guide [1], but it has seen its last update in |
9 |
> 2008. Since then, things have undoubtedly changed. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> What I can find on GCC upgrades and their apparent need (or no-need) for |
12 |
> rebuilding stuff: |
13 |
|
14 |
There are some packages that all need to be built with the same version of |
15 |
GCC. The whole qt-* family is an example, or at least it was a year ago |
16 |
(I'm not using KDE any more). Luckily they tend to be bumped as a unit. |
17 |
|
18 |
The biggest problem is building stuff with a newer version of gcc than the |
19 |
"system" version, either outside of portage, or selectively changing back |
20 |
with gcc-config. Programs can get linked to symbols in (usually) |
21 |
libstdc++.so.6 that have a symbol version that doesn't exist in the previous |
22 |
release. When you switch back to using that release as your system compiler, |
23 |
the libstc++ library also gets switched out, and suddenly your |
24 |
gcc-4.6-compiled firefox won't launch. If you've ever gotten a bug report |
25 |
like "libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.15' not found" then you've dealt |
26 |
with this. |
27 |
|
28 |
This isn't a problem most users encounter, but some do like to try to rebuild |
29 |
some of their system a bit at a time, and this is the reason why I usually |
30 |
recommend they rebuild everything. By making it an all or nothing affair, |
31 |
they're less likely to try hopping back and forth between versions. |
32 |
|
33 |
|
34 |
-- |
35 |
fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense |
36 |
toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime |
37 |
@ gentoo.org EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 |