| 1 |
Ühel kenal päeval, E, 15.04.2019 kell 10:40, kirjutas allan gottlieb: |
| 2 |
> On one of my machines I see |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> gottlieb@E6430 ~ $ eselect binutils list |
| 5 |
> [1] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.28.1 * |
| 6 |
> [2] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.29.1 |
| 7 |
> [3] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.30 |
| 8 |
> [4] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.31.1 |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> But I also see |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> gottlieb@E6430 ~ $ eix -I -e binutils |
| 13 |
> [?] sys-devel/binutils |
| 14 |
> ... |
| 15 |
> (2.28.1) [M]2.28.1 |
| 16 |
> (2.29.1) [M]2.29.1-r1 |
| 17 |
> (2.30) 2.30-r4 |
| 18 |
> (2.31) 2.31.1-r4 ~2.31.1-r5 |
| 19 |
> ... |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> So I am using a masked version of binutils, which seems bad. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> I presume I should do |
| 24 |
> eselect binutils set 4 |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> I am asking for confirmation since I realize breaking binutils |
| 27 |
> is not fun. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Yes, you should be using a newer version. I suggest reviewing your gcc- |
| 30 |
config as well; changing that may involve some migration (especially if |
| 31 |
very old version by now) or some specific rebuild needs. But binutils |
| 32 |
is generally an easy fire and forget switchover. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
After a bigger binutils or gcc upgrade (typically different |
| 35 |
major.minor) you should usually actually switch to it as well, and if |
| 36 |
everything worked out good, you can depclean the older versions (or |
| 37 |
keep 1-2 around for safety; or more if you actually need to test older |
| 38 |
GCC for some own programming work). |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Best, |
| 42 |
Mart |
Archives