1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:26 on Thursday 09 September 2010, Volker |
2 |
Armin Hemmann did opine thusly: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Thursday 09 September 2010, walt wrote: |
5 |
> > On 09/08/2010 03:10 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
6 |
> > > When building GCC, it will scan all headers in /usr/include and apply |
7 |
> > > fixes to them, and then copy them and use the modified versions. Now a |
8 |
> > > binary distro (AFAIK) will ship the GCC modified headers, so there's no |
9 |
> > > problem. |
10 |
> > > |
11 |
> > > Gentoo on the other hand will work as intended by GCC only if the user |
12 |
> > > re-emerges GCC after every time a package is emerged that installs |
13 |
> > > headers. Obviously, no user does that. |
14 |
> > > |
15 |
> > > So the question is simple; does Gentoo deal with this problem in any |
16 |
> > > way? |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > Maybe I misunderstand your question, but AFAIK the only reason to |
19 |
> > re-compile any package is if the libraries it links to have changed, no? |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > AFAICS gcc links only to libraries installed by glibc. therefore in the |
22 |
> > case of recompiling gcc itself, it should need/use only the headers |
23 |
> > installed by glibc. |
24 |
> > |
25 |
> > (And the only reason to re-compile an existing glibc is if the linux |
26 |
> > kernel headers change. I always re-compile glibc when the linux kernel |
27 |
> > headers change, but I never thought about re-compiling gcc as well. |
28 |
> > Maybe I should.) |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> > Corrections are requested if I'm wrong about all of this. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> hm, I never recompile glibc after a header update.... or anything else.... |
33 |
|
34 |
|
35 |
Me neither :-) |
36 |
|
37 |
I know I should, and why. But don't. |
38 |
|
39 |
I think the glibc and toolchain devs think the same way and go to |
40 |
extraordinary lengths to make sure stuff still works no matter hwo you go |
41 |
about it. |
42 |
|
43 |
|
44 |
|
45 |
-- |
46 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |