| 1 |
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 01:43:31PM -0700, Penguin Lover Richard Fish squawked: |
| 2 |
> You really should follow the gcc upgrade guide [1], which tells you to: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> source /etc/profile |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I did follow the guide and did source /etc/profile. I just forgot to |
| 8 |
type that step in in composing the e-mail. And I have a .bash_history |
| 9 |
to back me up ;p |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I did a bit of experimentation, actually, and found that the behaviour |
| 12 |
is different on my laptop and on my desktop. On my laptop where this |
| 13 |
problem originates (default-linux profile and ~x86 keyword): |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
1) no matter what I do with gcc-config (and sourcing /etc/profile |
| 16 |
afterwards of course), the emerge --info gives the same compiler. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
2) To actually affect the emerge --info I need to use 'eselect |
| 19 |
compiler set', i.e. now that I issued 'eselect compiler set 6', my |
| 20 |
emerge --info reads correctly |
| 21 |
Portage 2.1.2_pre1 (default-linux/x86/2006.0, gcc-4.1.1/vanilla |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
But on my desktop (which is on a hardened profile with x86 keyword) |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
3) gcc-config would successfully change the output of emerge --info |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
4) and 'eselect compiler' returns |
| 28 |
"!!! Error: Can't load module compiler" |
| 29 |
which is natural, since eselect-compiler is keyworded ~x86. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Are those the intended behaviour? Or is something seriously wacked up? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
W |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Computer games don't affect kids, I mean if Pac Man affected us as kids, we'd |
| 36 |
be sitting around in darkened rooms munching pills and listening to repetitive |
| 37 |
music. |
| 38 |
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 24 days, 14:43 |
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives