| 1 |
On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 16:31 -0600, MIkey wrote: |
| 2 |
> The way I read it, the gcc-3.4.4-r1.ebuild includes a dependency on |
| 3 |
> libstdc++-v3 and =sys-devel/gcc-3.3* if "build" is not in your USE |
| 4 |
> environment. The bootstrap during bootstrap.sh sets that build flag. Any |
| 5 |
> subsequent installs of gcc-3.4.4-r1 are going to install libstdc++-v3, no |
| 6 |
> matter what you do (at least x86 users). Or maybe I am just reading that |
| 7 |
> PDEPEND wrong. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
You're reading it wrong. The bootstrap USE flag is set during |
| 10 |
bootstrap, not the build USE flag. This means libstdc++-v3 (or gcc 3.3) |
| 11 |
is required at the bootstrap level. The reason that libstdc++-v3 |
| 12 |
doesn't get pulled into bootstrap is because gcc 3.3 is already |
| 13 |
installed. If you take a stage1 that was built with gcc 3.4, such as |
| 14 |
the builds I have been testing which will eventually become 2006.0, you |
| 15 |
will find that libstdc++-v3 is pulled into bootstrap, as expected. In |
| 16 |
the future, the dependency will be removed from gcc, as it is being |
| 17 |
transitioned off to packages that require it instead. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> Regardless, I have never had to mask out lower versions of gcc before. I |
| 20 |
> assumed the reason for the dependency was a half ass attempt to keep idiots |
| 21 |
> from thoughtlessly destroying their toolchain. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Perhaps it was to support binary packages that were linked against the |
| 24 |
older libstdc++ library? Like I said, these packages are having their |
| 25 |
dependencies updated to give a better dependency tree. Once that is |
| 26 |
done, the dependency will be removed some time after this release is out |
| 27 |
the door. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 31 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 32 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 33 |
Games - Developer |
| 34 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives