| 1 |
Hello again, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Roger Mason <rmason@×××.ca> writes: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> I need gcc 4.3 to compile a specific application. I am hoping that I |
| 6 |
> can install gcc 4.3 alongside 4.1.1 without suffering some awful |
| 7 |
> catastrophe. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Can someone confirm that I'll be able to use gcc 4.3 for the specific |
| 10 |
> application that needs it but then revert to 4.1.1 without having to |
| 11 |
> re-compile all or most of my system? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Thanks to all who replied. My home machine is compiling gcc 4.3 as I |
| 14 |
write this (it has been running all night). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The reason I stick with gcc 4.1.1 is that: |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
(a) I ran into problems during one of the gcc upgrades a couple of years |
| 19 |
back and ended up re-installing on a couple of boxes. Most of my |
| 20 |
machines are old and slow so gcc takes a while. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
(b) I have about a dozen heterogeneous machines that I use as a distcc |
| 23 |
compile farm and it it is a bit of a pain to upgrade all of them |
| 24 |
(bearing in mind that distcc can't be used to compile gcc). I suppose I |
| 25 |
should build gcc on the fastest box and install to the remainder as a |
| 26 |
binary. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Cheers, |
| 29 |
Roger |
Archives