| 1 |
On Thu, 24 May 2007 11:13:30 -0400, Denis wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> After reading some docs, the impression I get is that the 'nocona' |
| 4 |
> flag is for building a 64-bit system... For a 32-bit system, it seems |
| 5 |
> like 'prescott' would be the choice, wouldn't it? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Yes. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> We don't have gcc-4.2.0 in our portage available for installation yet, |
| 11 |
> do we? Anyone know when? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
When the devs consider it suitable for at least the testing branch or |
| 14 |
when you do "echo =sys-devel/gcc-4.2*" >>/etc/portage/package.mask, |
| 15 |
whichever comes sooner. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Bear in mind that GCC is almost certainly masked for good reason. It's |
| 18 |
not like you're using a binary distro and only need a compiler for a few |
| 19 |
packages. Feel free to try it in the knowledge that if it breaks your |
| 20 |
system, you get to keep the pieces. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Sects, sects, sects, is that all you monks think about? |
Archives